Not only can I say it, I think it's an irrefutable fact and anyone who disagrees is a hater or an idiot. Comparing Duke's freshmen year to Bush's junior year is rather unfair, though Duke's freshman year was good enough to get people to make the comparison I guess. But it is an iron clad fact that Duke's freshman year showed more explosiveness than Bush's freshman or sophomore years. Please tell me you disagree.
lulz
you don't even have to compare junior years. bush was running 10.3 out of hs and had the best shuttle (indicative of agility) on a usc roster full of studs as a freshman. also a state champion sprinter and also freakishly quick and stopped and started on a dime, norm chow called him the best tailback he'd ever seen. using stats alone to decipher who is more explosive is straight ****** logic.
You guys are changing the argument to try to hide from the obvious FAIL of your point.
This isn't about straight line speed. It's about EXPLOSIVENESS.
Duke Johnson's freshman year showed more explosiveness than either Bush's first or second years. That's in irrefutable FACT. Look at the long TDs Duke broke. Look at yards per carry.
Duke was also a better returner, though Bush's return numbers were comparable on fewer opportunities.
well
how do you measure explosiveness if not by raw hard numbers which are intended to do so? subjective opinion?
so if duke breaks off a run for 70 vs. bethune he's more explosive than bush who breaks off a 50 yarder vs. arizona state? duke also had more opportunities with 49 more carries and more returns. bush was splitting carries with other nfl draft picks. there's way more than goes into it. duke is **** good and should be very special in time, he's not on that level yet.
I don't understand your question. The raw hard numbers you measure explosiveness by are things like yards per carry and long TDs.
Speed isn't a hard number to measure explosiveness by. It's a hard number to measure speed by. That's why they call it that. There have been plenty of fast guys who didn't end up being that explosive in football. And again, you have Hester, who's the most _explosive_ returner ever, but nowhere near the fastest.
If explosive means something different from fast, then claiming speed resolves explosiveness is utterly ignorant. And if you think it means the same thing, then you're wasting everyone's time here.
And re "duke is **** good and should be very special in time, he's not on that level yet." What are you talking about? No one here has said Duke is already better than Bush was as a Junior. You're setting up a false dichotomy. Duke is already better than Bush was as a freshman or sophomore. That's a fact.
