Obviously the only way a one-sided arguement like this could be had would be over on the baseball side.
I can't even believe that Adrian Peterson was compared to Ron Dayne in this thread, that is the single stupidest comparison I have ever heard in football. Peterson is a virtual lock to go in the top 3 next year and value wise, he is head and shoulders above any other player in his class.
I don't know if you guys realise this, but Reggie Bush plays in the Pac-10, or the Pac-1 as it should be more accurately referred to as. No team in this entire conference has any semblance of a defence and even though the Big 12 is no SEC there are still a bunch of solid defensive teams.
Oh and by the way, everyone should stop using Barry Sanders comparisons when it comes to smaller backs that aren't effective running between the tackles. Every year some overrated small back that doesn't run with power comes in and people knock on them about their size, and everyone and their grandmother says "Tell Barry Sanders that size doesn't matter." I am still waiting for one of these running backs to live up to 1/10th of the legacy Barry left behind.
I am not saying Bush isn't an elite talent, he is the #1 player on my draft board (assuming I don't have a stud RB already and a need at OT or QB) but anyone who thinks he is head and shoulders above Peterson either does not know anything about football or is deluding themselves. I think that people are really starting to buy into the hype and when I hear things like "next Gale Sayers" or "best college RB ever" it makes me wonder if people simply forget about the dominant things people before them have done.
BTW, there is a thread about this on the football side. You can find me arguing as Canadian_Cheesehead. Always good to have more people to argue about what casual football fans would consider to be a landslide win in Bush's favour.
2nd in the Baseball Leg of the Cafe Challenge.