Reggie Bush???

by ClevelandRock5 on May 9, 2011 4:01 PM EDT

Saints just drafted a running back in the first round, and the general consensus seems to be that Reggie Bush isn't long for New Orleans. I haven't heard any mention of it, but I think Reggie would be a perfect fit for the Browns. He's ridiculously explosive, something the Browns offensive is in dire need of, and he catches the ball with ease out of the backfield. A perfect complement to Hills and Hardesty and a perfect fit for the WCO. The argument could be made that Bush would be an expensive complimentary player - and that's a legit point. But I think he'd be perfect for the team, and I'd love to see Holmgren go out and get him.

This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.

Tweet Comment 34 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Yay, let’s have two brittle RBs on the team for the price of 5. I love it.

Nissan GT - R.

Sexy. Sexy. Sexy.

by SpecialBrownie on May 9, 2011 4:28 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

I think if we can reel him in at a reasonable price that he would be a huge piece in our offense.

Evil wins again, but Truth prevails where Good fails.

by North Coast Flea on May 9, 2011 4:44 PM EDT reply actions

You mean pieces. Since he’ll be broken into them.

Nissan GT - R.

Sexy. Sexy. Sexy.

by SpecialBrownie on May 9, 2011 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Pass.

2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion

by TheDriveStillHurts on May 9, 2011 4:54 PM EDT reply actions

He’s a more useful Josh Cribbs, so I say do it.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on May 9, 2011 7:27 PM EDT reply actions

Bush > most of our WR corps.

"You are the worst villains in football, your evil plan never ceases."-Mooncamping

by discoinferno083 on May 9, 2011 8:44 PM EDT reply actions

I love bush!

Dawgs by Nature -- where Mike Holmgren, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on May 9, 2011 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions

The bushier, the better, I say!

Dawgs by Nature -- where Mike Holmgren, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on May 9, 2011 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs

Yikes.

"I want my unwarranted optimism back." -Dilbert

by Simmsinns on May 10, 2011 5:47 AM EDT up reply actions

Woah woah woah.

They better obama that osama before I go all clinton.

Nissan GT - R.

Sexy. Sexy. Sexy.

by SpecialBrownie on May 10, 2011 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Stuckey-Little-Bush

quite a WR corp.

Resident Tim Couch Apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on May 10, 2011 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Indeed. Almost enough to make me wish we hadn’t traded our douche to the Jets.

Dawgs by Nature -- where Mike Holmgren, apparently, 'did some good things'.

by golanbatrac on May 10, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs

Out-stand-ing.

Resident Tim Couch Apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on May 10, 2011 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions

To say the least, he could probably start at WR for us.

by UnSafe 70 on May 10, 2011 8:28 AM EDT reply actions

Greg Little is a bulkier and potentially more effective Reggie Bush type of player. Little can catch and has played RB. If Bush were signed inexpensively, then sure, but we should by no means pay a premium for him.

by chitown browns fan on May 10, 2011 10:01 AM EDT reply actions

We pay a premium for Cribbs, who is a lesser player than Bush.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on May 10, 2011 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions

I consider Cribbs an elite special teamer, one of very few who can do what he can do in that aspect of the game. In the spirit of full disclosure, I’m not a fan of Cribbs as WR. We may pay a premium for Cribbs’s services, but I do not believe that’s because of his contribution as a WR. His recently frequent contributions at the WR position are more functions of our lack of depth at the position and his desire to expand his skill set. As for who may be a lesser player between the two, on special teams, I would take Cribbs over Bush. Bush is the better WR/RB hybrid between the two, but again, I feel Little might be able to contribute – in combo with Cribbs – in that hybrid role to enough of an extent to not warrant paying a premium for Bush.

by chitown browns fan on May 10, 2011 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions

I think you are massively underrating Bush as a special teams player. He doesn’t play on coverage units (then again, Cribbs doesn’t anymore either) but he’s a better punt returner than Cribbs and probably about as good of a kick returner at this point.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on May 10, 2011 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions

If Cribbs re-embraced the special teams coverage and return duties of old, I’d say Cribbs is the much more effective special teamer. Also, I can’t help but believe that Cribbs’s expanded offensive role – not to mention his injuries – took a toll on his return performance this past year.

by chitown browns fan on May 11, 2011 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions

It was never a problem with Cribbs “embracing” that role. He loved it. But even before his injury last year he looked incredibly slow and just wasn’t very good.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on May 15, 2011 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I think it’s time to admit that the Cribbs experiment at WR has failed.

That doesn’t mean he doesn’t offer good utility to the team. I think he still has a lot of talent and plays with great heart. But, using him like an every-down guy is not working. He can still be used in a spread, in trick plays or as a decoy. But, we really need him to pick us up on special teams again.

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is. -- Yogi Berra

by JustPlainBrowns on May 10, 2011 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions

100% agree with this. Cribbs was much more effective when used on return and coverage units on special teams instead of his current role.

by chitown browns fan on May 11, 2011 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions

Yep. We should have never taken him off coverage, he was a beast gunner.

I live for Christ the KING.

by jlsclarity on May 11, 2011 5:56 AM EDT up reply actions

I know Little played some RB but I think that was more a function of “let’s give the best athlete the ball more often”. On the browns, Little will line up out wide on every down he’s on the field, barring any real crazy trickery. Reggie would be a tandem RB and a slot receiver. I really don’t see Bush and Little overlapping at all. Bush is a perfect fit for the WCO, and will allow a young QB to make dink and dunk passes successful.

by ClevelandRock5 on May 10, 2011 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions

My hangup with Bush is that I’ve always seen him as a RB, and in the league, he’s never fit well in that role because he can’t run between the tackles and he goes down easily after contact. His career numbers (4.0 yards/carry) are okay but pedestrian; he’s more exciting to watch than he is good on a per play basis. I could see him being a slot receiver (7.3 yards/reception over his career), but then your point about successful dink and dunk passes relies on his ability to break tackles, which, again, is not his forte. His forte is elusiveness, and I think his true value as a player in NO hinges on his simply being on the field and having to be accounted for by the defense as one of several legitimate offensive weapons, not being the go-to guy necessarily. With a team like ours, I’d rather see us get the right side of our offensive line in order before we paid a premium for Bush. Again, if he were available for a reasonable price, sure.

by chitown browns fan on May 10, 2011 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions