For all you Reggie Bush haters, STFU

This is an article comparing one of the best running backs in Marshall Faulk to one who was projected to be one of the best, Reggie Bush.

I have a list of things both of these running backs have in common.

Now, I am not saying that Bush is as good as Faulk was, but what I am saying will probably change your minds on Reggie Bush being labeled as a bust.

Faulk was taken second overall in the 1994 draft by the Indianapolis Colts and Bush was taken second overall in the 2006 draft by the New Orleans Saints.

Both players went to 3-13 teams.

Faulk was born in New Orleans in 1973, Reggie Bush began his NFL career in New Orleans.

Now I will begin to actually compare Faulk's and Bush's careers. I will mostly base this comparison on the first three years of their careers.

Bush has yet to pass the 1,000 yard mark on the ground, but like Faulk, Bush has been very effective in the receiving game.

In his first three years, Marshall Faulk recorded 164 receptions, 1425 receiving yards, and four receiving touchdowns. Bush recorded 213 receptions, 1599 receiving yards and eight receiving touchdowns.

Faulk and Bush both had issues with fumbling in their first three seasons. Faulk fumbled 15 times, while Bush fumbled 13 times.

Another issue that troubled Faulk was injuries in his third season. That limited him to just 13 games. In Bush's third season, he was also injured, causing him to miss games.

By comparing these two men solely on the third seasons of their careers, we see that Bush averaged 3.8 yards per carry and Marshall Faulk averaged 3.0 yards per carry.

Now many people might want to bite my neck off for this article comparing Bush to a future Hall of Famer in Faulk, but it is something I felt should be looked at by others.

Faulk came back in his fourth season and made up for his poor third season.

I hope that Reggie Bush can turn his career around like Faulk did and give the Saints the explosive running game that many people expected.