Was because they already knew back then that this "scandal" was going to break loose and didn't want to deal with it??
2006-09-15 11:36:13 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
That's not a reason. The "scandal" isn't going to affect his pro career at all. The reason they didn't is because the Texans thought they would need a runningback or defensive player, which were Reggie Bush and Mario Williams, I think they will eventually become successful with Mario.
2006-09-15 11:45:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES. It was one of many reasons they didn't draft him.
They are a young franchise and they didn't want him making the team look bad. (rumors of this scandal started leaked out a year ago)
The Bush's people were threatening to hold out and demanding huge money, way more than any #1pick ever. They thought they could force the Texans to take their deal.
RB's don't last more than 3 or 4 years, they needed a 10 year player for the amount of money they were spending.
He already had a bad rep as being a prima donna and locker room cancer, they didn't want that on their young team either.
The mistake the Texans made was keeping the 1st pick, they could've made a deal with someone else in the top five, got some extra picks, and still got Mario Williams for less money.
2006-09-16 00:44:27 · answer #2 · answered by biggie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sure it had a lot to do with it. But I also thought that they were cognizant of the fact that you can't build a winner with a back first as they are likely to get injured. The average career length is around 5 years. So if you take away the scandal, it is still a wise move to draft Mario Williams because it would seem that it will take longer to build a consistent winner the right way than to draft a back who might have his career ended by an injury.
2006-09-15 22:43:59 · answer #3 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, the texans took Williams because defense wins championships and they were planning on switching from a 3-4 to 4-3 so they needed a quality DE. Plus, with Kubiak coming in as coach the backs the Texans had already fit the running scheme better. Kubiak needs powerful guys who will make one cut then run downfield. Bush probably wouldn't be able to handle the work load in that offense from constantly going between the tackles.
2006-09-15 19:16:59 · answer #4 · answered by air_of_truth 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No Houston didn't draft Bush because they didn't need him at the time...Dominick Davis was supposed to be ready to play, but that didn't turn out so well for them. Next year they'll be taking a RB..maybe at the same pick again too -_- R1P1. Didn't need a RB...took a defensive guy, something they did need.
2006-09-15 19:47:03 · answer #5 · answered by Carolina Kitten 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably the didn't draft Bush because they were confident on Domanick Daivs. He's a young RB and he has a couple 1000+ rushing yard seasons under his belt.
The bad news is that Davis is now on IR
2006-09-15 18:58:05 · answer #6 · answered by Atreides1998 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Naw, they just didn't feel they needed 2 feature running backs. They made a good choice drafting Mario Williams, but they should've drafted Fergusson out of Virginia cause their offensive line sucks.
2006-09-15 20:22:20 · answer #7 · answered by scorpion187us 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They picked Mario Williams because they thought that was the only way they could get somebody who could get to Peyton Manning. Without somebody to put pressure on Manning they would never have a chance at winning the division.
2006-09-15 18:46:21 · answer #8 · answered by Freddy89326 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Do you really think the the Texans, or any NFL team, gives a sh** how much money any player got under the table in college? Get real.
2006-09-15 20:12:51 · answer #9 · answered by stan l 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why would that matter? The NFL wouldn't penalize Bush for whatever he did in college.
2006-09-15 18:38:24 · answer #10 · answered by heshootshescores3 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋