According to Adam Schefter this morning on Mike & Mike, he stated that Reggie Bush's number 1 team that he could go to once he is cut will be the us, the Dolphins.

I stated months ago this reality of this, but everyone on here pretty much bashed me for it.

I believe Reggie Bush is one of the most underrated players in this league. The problem is, everyone expected him to be the next Gale Sayers. He is not.

But what he is, is the best 3rd down back in the league hands down and the moment he got injured last year the Saints were not the same team. he is the best recieving back in the league and one of the best punt returners (Devone Bess sucks, BTW).

If the price is right, look for Bush to be a Dolphin.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

I would absolutely love to see it. The guy is a threat to score every time he touches the ball and can impact a game in so many different ways. Also, I think he will be more motivated than ever this season.

Phinsfan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He's a 3rd down back.


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
You are exactly right. But the thing is, he is the best 3rd down back in the league...hands down.

We just drafted a pounding tailback, we need a player like Bush.

I think that what he does well (recieving, punt returning) he does amazingly...and thats the two things we are looking for.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Honestly it just depends on who else we target once we can sign free agents. We clearly need more speed on offense and I really hope we're able to get Reggie or DeAngelo Williams.

I am also looking forward to Ross making a Free Agency "splash", and Bush is an obvious target for that splash.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

The impression I got from earlier articles about Bush's free agency was that he was looking for a BIG payday. As was said already, he needs to be signed for a bargain plus incentives.

he's always hurt, which can't be good for a guy who relies on explosiveness. I'd love to have him, but not for twice the price of darren sproles. I think he'll want too much money.

JC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The impression I got from earlier articles about
> Bush's free agency was that he was looking for a
> BIG payday. As was said already, he needs to be
> signed for a bargain plus incentives.


Bush may be looking for a big payday, but the reality he'll have to face is that he isn't going to get one. He's injury prone, he has fumbling issues, he's never had more than 600 yards rushing, and his career average per rush is a pedestrian 4.0 yards per carry. He is a good receiver out of the backfield, but he's also coming off his least productive season. He had an amazing 2008 as a punt returner, but he's been pretty lousy at returning punts in every season but that one. And he's only returned one kickoff in his pro career. He is a 3rd down back, and that's it. And he'll have to check his ego, and accept a deal befitting a 3rd down back. And Miami needs to fill this hole. So, the question will become, how long can the Fins afford to wait for Bush to realize he's not going to get a big deal? They can't wait him out forever while other options are being scooped up by other teams.

And with all respect to A&O, I don't think Bush is hands down the best 3rd down RB in the league. I think Sproles may be better. Sproles averages 4.6 yards per carry for his career, and his yards per reception the last 3 years blow Bush's away. He's more durable, and he's been a better return man.

Can someone explain to me what exactly a "3rd down back" really is? I hear phrases like "change of pace" back but how is a 3rd down back supposed to be different from your starter or "every down back"? I'm confused because 3rd down is a crucial situation so I don't understand why rushing duties would be given to a team's 2nd string running back in that situation.

Is the rushing style supposed to be different? Does it refer to a different style runner like a slasher over a bruiser? It just seems like you'd want to go with your best option if you were going to run on 3rd down so I don't understand the concept of putting in a lesser runner during such a play. And i you were going to pass, wouldn't you want your star running back catching the ball out of the backfield or catching a quick out as opposed to his back up? If anything "3rd down back" sounds like the more important job and the better player.

3d down back implies 3d and long---you don't need a 4 yard up the middle guy who can't catch but a fast guy who can catch and suprise with some speed on unexpected draw plays. just like we'd give lou polite the ball on 4th and 1 but not 2d and 10---his specialty is picking up 1 yard on a dive up the middle, a 3d down back's specialty is change of pace and ability to catch

Panteraize Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can someone explain to me what exactly a "3rd down
> back" really is?

A third-down back would be a RB deployed on third down. They come in all shapes and sizes.


> I hear phrases like "change of
> pace" back but how is a 3rd down back supposed to
> be different from your starter or "every down
> back"?

“Change of pace” would be a RB who, theoretically, when inserted into a lineup, influences, or “changes,” the pace, or tempo, an offensive team may be displaying in a game situation.

And if a team has an “every down back,” they might not need a third-down back so much, right?


> I'm confused because 3rd down is a crucial
> situation so I don't understand why rushing duties
> would be given to a team's 2nd string running back
> in that situation.
>
> Is the rushing style supposed to be different?
> Does it refer to a different style runner like a
> slasher over a bruiser? It just seems like you'd
> want to go with your best option if you were going
> to run on 3rd down so I don't understand the
> concept of putting in a lesser runner during such
> a play.

A team probably wouldn’t pull the better runner if it were in a third and short type situation.


> And i you were going to pass, wouldn't you
> want your star running back catching the ball out
> of the backfield or catching a quick out as
> opposed to his back up? If anything "3rd down
> back" sounds like the more important job and the
> better player.


Third downs are critical, and a team would probably deploy their best option. If a team were to have a “star” RB, who can help convert third downs, yes, the team would probably leave the star RB in.


Like Berk said, what you’re hearing about is probably a description of RBs who specialize in pass catching, RBs that enter a game with an ability to catch passes out of the backfield, but are not necessarily powerful or durable enough to run between the tackles on a regular basis.

Reggie Bush would probably fit that criterion, in general, at least the durability quotient.

Most offenses install an array of packages for given situations in a game. If it were third and short, the Dolphins might have brought in Lousake Polite, a “short yardage” back. Third and long could involve no RBs in the backfield (especially if a team were to have a QB that could run).

Third and medium situations would probably utilize separate packages, packages for Third & 2-3 yards, and packages for Third & 4-6 yards, and each of those packages could deploy different RBs. The Dolphins will probably have at least six plays for Third and medium situations, and the majority of those plays will be for Third & 4-6 yards, so the Dolphins will need a RB to help convert third downs of four or more yards.

It’s really all about who can give you what. Sure, ideally, a team would love to have a RB who can do everything, but, those aren’t so easy to acquire. Know of any?

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The impression I got from earlier articles
> about
> > Bush's free agency was that he was looking for
> a
> > BIG payday. As was said already, he needs to
> be
> > signed for a bargain plus incentives.
>
>
> Bush may be looking for a big payday, but the
> reality he'll have to face is that he isn't going
> to get one. He's injury prone, he has fumbling
> issues, he's never had more than 600 yards
> rushing, and his career average per rush is a
> pedestrian 4.0 yards per carry. He is a good
> receiver out of the backfield, but he's also
> coming off his least productive season.

Agree with all the above, but often what happens with a player in Bush's situation is a desperate team overpays for him. I just don't want us to be that team.

Didn't he bang one of the Kardashians for a while? He can come as long as Ross doesn't make any of them a Minority owner.

"Devon Bess Sucks"????? lol.

I hope you meant as a punt returner. He's they only receiver on this team at present who you can count on to catch the ball when it hits him in the hands.

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Devon Bess Sucks"????? lol.
>
> I hope you meant as a punt returner. He's they
> only receiver on this team at present who you can
> count on to catch the ball when it hits him in the
> hands.


Im positive he meant as a punt returner.

And i agree he doesnt get many yards after the catch and fumbles a lot. So He is not very good as a punt returner overall.......

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reggie Bush has been a Jack-of-All-Trades and
> master of none, and that has been the problem in
> most peoples eyes. I do agree however, that if you
> are drafted #2 overall, you should be a master of
> something.
>
> But it still doesnt change the fact that Reggie
> Bush is a difference maker.
>
> Mark, you are hands down the stats guy on the
> board and I am pretty sure everybody knows it....
>
> but this is one instance that stats are a little
> misleading. What your stats are NOT taking in to
> effect is the Saints winning % with Reggie Bush on
> the field. He is a mismatch and headache for D
> coordinators, and the Saints were not the same
> team when he got injured.


He does create mismatches, for sure. And that is a thing that can't be quantified. But, I'm not impressed with his durability, yards per carry, or his return ability outside of 2008. I would prefer Sproles over Bush. I think I'd prefer Bradshaw over any of them, but he may be too expensive. I would prefer to see us spend less money on Sproles, and have some cash to sign one of the good guards on the market.

I hope Reggie eats his wheaties! Sproles is making a pretty strong case in GB!

PR for TD and the breaks of a 60 yarder on the next PR...looks good catching the ball too.

I was on record in support of Sproles over Bush as well. Let's see if his renewed dedication pays off and makes him look as good as he did at USC!

Let's go Reggie!

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

Sproles is beasting it up tonight!!!

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

What worries me about bush is his weight he is barely 200 pounds. Thats light for an every down back. Too light.

But then again barry sanders didnt weight much more than 200 pounds so we'll see. Yeah i know there is only one barry sanders.

reggie is really going to improve our offense alot! Glad we sighned him.....GOOD MOVE MIAMI!!!

bush as change of pace/receiver out of backfield. good signing.
bush as everydown, between the tackles back. bad signing.

from what the team has been saying, they are trying to make this into a bad signing. but of course, ireland and sporano know more than sean payton and even bush's college coach pete carroll, who knew enough to make him the change of pace guy, not the every down guy. same arrogance that makes them think they can sign players cut by DAL for sucking and immediately install them into the starting OL.

hopefully this every down stuff is just a smoke screen.

Reggie Bush has to be our MVP. Guys has really stepped his game up.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

I admit I was wrong about him. Still we are not using him correctly---he had like 1 catch today and I'd like to see him split out wide more with Thomas in the backfield. Still you can't argue with 200 yds rushing

Agree...but Moore should get serious consideration too.

I agree 100% Berk, and Ken, no.


Moore has played well...but mot our MVP.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"