Page 3 of 3

Re: Reggie Bush for Heisman

Posted: November 25th, 2005, 3:51 am
by The Ancient Enemy
Speed doesn't always equal greatness. But I guess you already know all about that.

Re: Reggie Bush for Heisman

Posted: November 25th, 2005, 5:05 pm
by HOLLYWOOD
yeah no kidding, I was talking about good playas!

Re: Reggie Bush for Heisman

Posted: November 25th, 2005, 5:47 pm
by The Ancient Enemy
I must have snuck that one in under the radar.

Posted: November 25th, 2005, 11:18 pm
by ham55
Too bad Butler isn't a RB. Neither is Robinson. 4-10 vs. Pitt yesterday? Man, he was setting the world on fire. Too bad the BCS team they play won't have a terrible D-front like Pitt does. Enjoy the wins while they come. 40-0 sound good for a WVU bowl LOSS!?

Posted: November 25th, 2005, 11:56 pm
by fleaflicker
Getting back onto the Heisman, Reggie Bush probably will take home the trophy for being the best player on the best team. But, would USC be less successful without Reggie Bush? Doubtful. They would give more carries to Lendale White, and he would probably be almost as good as Reggie Bush, and USC would still be unbeaten. So, as far as actually being the player that means the most to his team, Reggie Bush falls short.

What about Matt Leinart? It's hard to say. John David Booty is waiting in the wings, and I think USC also has a true freshman from last year that was one of the top 2 QB prospects in the country. USC MIGHT have one loss without Leinart at QB, but they also might not. So as far as making his team a contender, Leinart means more than Reggie Bush, but he also isn't going to win the trophy twice in a row.

What about Vince Young? Texas is undefeated with a relatively easy schedule, but would they be as good as they are without Vince Young? Looking at the leadership and game breaking ability Young has provided Texas in not only running the ball, but throwing it (kind of surprising actually) as well, I don't think Texas would have been able to run their slate without Vince Young at QB. It doesn't seem like they have the depth USC has, and Young being a double threat makes Texas a much harder team to defend against. So if one were to look at the Heisman as being the person that means the most to their team, Vince Young will have led the Longhorns (after one more one) to the national title game. And I seriously doubt they could have done it without hims.

Another person that has meant a lot to their team is Micheal Robinson with his clutch plays and great leadership, but he hasn't quite led PSU to the national title game. He is deserving from the perspective of meaning a lot to Penn State, and has led them to a BCS bowl game, but they still haven't made it to the Rose.

So if a person wants to take a viewpoint as a player that has most defined their team, Vince Young wins, hands down. What are your thoughts?

Posted: November 26th, 2005, 12:47 am
by Gunner18
flea your an idiot...who do you think won them the fresno game? soitenly (certainly with a curly stooge accent) not lendale!