Reggie Bush: Why Miami Dolphins RB Will Struggle Against Arizona
Miami Dolphins running back Reggie Bush has had a terrific start to the season. Through three games, Bush has rushed for 302 yards on only 50 carries, good for a healthy six yards per carry. He's rushed for two touchdowns, as well.
During Week 2 against Oakland, Bush had maybe the best game of his career, rushing for 172 yards on 26 carries.
This week he is going up against the surprising 3-0 Arizona Cardinals. The Cardinals have won on the strength of their defense. They have the ninth-ranked pass defense and the 18th-ranked run defense.
The Cards have allowed only two touchdowns all year, which is fewest in the NFL. They have given up only 40 points, which is the second-fewest in the league. They have 12 sacks from seven different players.
Miami is the No. 4 rushing offense. They’re averaging 175 yards and 5 yards a carry, so it’s one of those ‘What’s going to give?’” Horton said. “Either we’re going to get better or they’re going to continue to get better on their side of the ball. There’s some factors involved in that, too, the score of the game and what I’m calling.
Bush is having a great year, there's no doubting that. But this is his first real test. For one, the Cardinals are the best defense he's faced so far. That's a challenge in itself.
Second, the Cardinals will surely load up to stop Bush. That means eight, even nine men in the box. They're going to want to force Ryan Tannehill and a weak receiving core to beat them.
Bush is going to have a tough time running against a stout defensive line. And forget about touchdowns; Arizona just doesn't give them up.
Bush, who is also dealing with a knee injury that has him listed as questionable, is not running behind a good enough offensive line to create holes for him. And while Bush can excel in space, his knee injury might limit him.
Bush has had a good year, but this week is just not a favorable match-up. He will most surely struggle.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?