1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

College football Week 7 thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Steak Snabler, Oct 7, 2013.

  1. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    Young didn't return kicks, either.
     
  2. Bodie_Broadus

    Bodie_Broadus Active Member

    I loved watching VY play, he had a fantastic season. But Bush was on some other level.

    You take away VY's running stats and Brady Quinn and Matt Leinart were better.

    But the rushing was a huge part of VY's game. I loved him as a college player but I can't get there in saying he was better than Bush.
     
  3. Bodie_Broadus

    Bodie_Broadus Active Member

    Oh and ND, if you wanna cite stats get them correct VY was not seven yards shy of 1,000. He was 50 yards over 1,000.
     
  4. NDJournalist

    NDJournalist Active Member

    Why would you take away the running stats of a 1,000-yard rusher. The fact that he rushed for over 1,000 yards as well is one of the main reasons I think he should have won the Heisman.

    Plus, he carried that team. Bush had Lendale White and Matt Leinart in the backfield to steal some of the attention of opposing defenses.
     
  5. Bodie_Broadus

    Bodie_Broadus Active Member

    Jamaal Charles had a fairly good season for UT if I remember correctly. I don't think he topped 1,000, but I'd bet his YPC was close to Bush.
     
  6. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    Nope.

    Charles: 119 carries, 878 yards, 7.49 ypc, 11 TDs

    Bush: 200 carries, 1,740 yards, 8.7 ypc, 16 TDs

    A difference of 1.21 yards is a lot, especially on about 40 percent more carries. And Bush also returned kickoffs and punts and was a weapon as a receiver (37 receptions for a 12.9-yard average, which is extremely high for a running back). He had nearly 3,000 all-purpose yards.

    Charles was a very good running back that year, particularly for a freshman. But Bush was on another level.
     
  7. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    I tend to agree with this.

    Mariota is nice. Strong. Tremendous. Devastating.

    And Manziel put up 500 yards of offense against the 2-time defending national champions. He hasn't lost a step. He's probably a step better than last season. And, he's still the No. 1 contender.
     
  8. Bodie_Broadus

    Bodie_Broadus Active Member

    I watched damn near every USC game that season and I have never been wowed the way I was watching Bush play. He really was on a different level.

    The Fresno State game stands out in my mind more than probably any other if not for that run where he just totally stopped his momentum and then kept going.
     
  9. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Actually, according to that logic, every player to ever win the Heisman - or any other individual award - is a fraud because they're all products of the system they played in.

    I've always thought this was a stupid fucking argument against anybody.

    Jay Berwanger was a product of the system he played in. So was Nile Kinnick. And Tom Harmon. And Earl Campbell, etc., etc., etc.
     
  10. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    You realize Kurt Warner played at Northern Iowa, right?
     
  11. Bodie_Broadus

    Bodie_Broadus Active Member

    Is that necessarily true though?

    That means that individual talent doesn't mean anything. I doubt if you put Teddy Bridgewater on Oregon he'd be doing the same thing Mariota is doing.
     
  12. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    My point is, every coach in America is going to get the ball to his best player as much as possible. Thus, those players are "products of their system" because the "system" is designed to take advantage of what they do best.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page