Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
Let’s get this out of the way: Reggie Bush is nothing more than a glorified punt returner. And don’t get me wrong, he’s a fine, fine return man. But that’s about where it ends. He’s not a running back. He’s not a wide receiver. Yet -- when he’s actually healthy -- the Saints insist on trying to make him some combination of both of those positions and it’s to the team’s detriment.
It’s easy to understand why they try to gameplan to Bush’s strength, which is getting himself one-on-one (or even one-on-two) with defenders in the open field. After all, they did waste a No. 2 overall pick on the guy. But the Saints are a better team when Reggie isn’t participating.
New Orleans’ record with Bush this season: 3-4; without him: 3-1. Yes, that’s an oversimplified way to make my argument, but if you saw the way the Saints played last night, you’d understand why they’re better sans Reggie. When they don’t feel obligated to get Bush his 10-20 touches, it allows Drew Brees the freedom to do what he does, which last night consisted of 20-of-26 for 323 yards with four TDs.
Bush is supposed to be back next week for a huge match-up in Tampa, so he’ll likely have a monster game and make me look foolish. Either way, at this point, the team is still a longshot to make the playoffs even at 6-5. After the game Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma said, "There's an old saying, '10 and you're in. We've got to find a way to get to 10 wins and get into the playoffs." Unfortunately, that rule won’t apply this season in the NFC. With four teams currently ahead of them in the Wild Card standings, all of whom could very well get to 10 wins too, New Orleans may need to win out. That’s an awfully difficult proposition with Tampa, Chicago, Carolina and Atlanta still remaining on their schedule.
This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.
8 comments
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
Scoreboard data copyright © 2012 by STATS LLC. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of STATS LLC is strictly prohibited.
OpenCalais - Powered by Thomson Reuters
•
Odds Shark 
Comments
I never thought much of the guy myself. He was great in college, but it’s clear that he will never erach that level of play in the NFL. I hope that he’s saving some of his money.
by jaek on Nov 25, 2008 3:15 PM EST reply actions
Because football teams are better when they’re one-dimensional?
by eatchinesefood51 on Nov 25, 2008 6:30 PM EST reply actions
They’re one-dimensional with or without Reggie Bush’s 42 rushing yards per game. The difference is that without him, they don’t feel forced to get him touches in creative ways and instead can just let Brees do his thing. "His thing" meaning "be the best QB in the NFC."
by cmottram on Nov 25, 2008 7:22 PM EST reply actions
It’s not as if Brees throws for 157 yards and two picks when Bush is in there. He always has those Nintendo numbers, regardless of who plays. I’d like a little more meat on the plate than "record with vs record without." That holds no water in today’s NFL, which consists of the Giants and everyone else.
by ChiAdam on Nov 26, 2008 11:14 AM EST reply actions
Adam, if you actually read the words in the post, you’d see that I admit record comparisons is a "oversimplified" argument, which is why I went on to explain my position.
by cmottram on Nov 26, 2008 11:18 AM EST reply actions
I did actually read the words. I read how you gave one argument and then shot it down yourself. The good news is that you don’t have to wait for Bush to make you look like an idiot.
by ChiAdam on Nov 26, 2008 12:04 PM EST reply actions
How did I shoot down my own argument? It remained the same throughout: The Saints are better without Bush.
by cmottram on Nov 26, 2008 12:17 PM EST reply actions
With Bush: Beat Bucs (only divisional win of season, against strongest opponent of the season), 49ers, Raiders (losing teams). Lost to Redskins, Vikings, and Broncos (winning teams) by a combined 10 points.
Half Bush: played less than half of the Panthers loss before getting injured, final score was 30-7.
Without Bush: Wins against KC, SD, GB (losing teams), but lost by 2 touchdowns to Atlanta.
The Saints were competitve in all their games with Bush and had their best win with him. They weren’t even competitive without him against the Panthers and Falcons, the divisional games. The Saints beat all losing teams with or without Bush, but they played better against winning teams with Bush and beat the Bucs.
Yes, you oversimplified because "SAINTS BETTER WITH BUSH" isn’t a story. I have been skeptical of Bush too but he put up 8 touchdowns in 6.5 games, seriously alters how teams defend the Saints, and has a measurable effect on the Saints actually beating winning teams, which 4 of the final 5 opponents are.
by Bigdawg on Nov 27, 2008 2:38 AM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed