Early in the 2011 season, the Raiders offense was really clicking thanks to the one-two punch combination of running backs Darren McFadden and Michael Bush. McFadden is the more electric running back, using his blend of speed, power and shiftiness as the big-play back. Bush is the 250-pound bruiser, wearing down defenses and imposing his will. The team has leaned on both of these backs for their offensive success and, in most cases, it has worked well for them.
The issue with each of these backs lies with the perception that neither will be able to be a "go-to guy" for an entire NFL season. McFadden, as exciting as he is, hasn't played a full season in four years, due to a variety of injuries. Bush is viewed as a back that has to be paired with a smaller, quicker counterpart so the "thunder and lightning" combination can succeed. Regardless, each of these backs are effective in their own respective way.
ESPN's John Clayton tweeted that the Raiders could have a tough time being able to hold onto both backs going into 2012 because of salary cap issues.

It will be hard for the Raiders to keep both McFadden and Bush because of the salary cap.
So why is this tidbit of Raiders news being discussed on a Bengals blog? It's because the Bengals are in the market for a running back and one of these two players would fit the bill. With McFadden entering the final year in his lucrative rookie contract and Bush set to become a restricted free agent this season, this is a logical place the Bengals could look to make a move.
McFadden seems to be more like the type of back that the Bengals will be in the market for this offseason. They need speed and athleticism at the position and he definitely provides both. With the Bengals' West Coast Offense going into its second season, McFadden is the type of back that offensive coordinator Jay Gruden would love to have. His injury issues aside, the major hurdle for the Bengals in acquiring McFadden is that they would have to swing a trade for him. We also don't know if the Raiders are open to trading McFadden at this point, given their love of having players with speed. The Raiders do have a new General Manager who has been entrenched in housecleaning mode, so he could look to get McFadden's big contract off of the books.
For a few reasons, the more sensible acquisition of the two backs for the Bengals would be Bush. The Bengals have been linked to Bush dating back to the 2008 and 2009 seasons. If you remember, there were rumblings that the Bengals looked at drafting Bush late in the 2008 draft when he went pro. Then, when Chad Ochocinco made his trade demands public, rumors began to float that the Raiders were offering Bush in a trade offer for the then-Bengals wide receiver. Bush was a restricted free agent last offseason as well, and there were some more rumors of the Bengals being interested. Now may be the time for the Bengals to strike.
It's now just a matter of if the Bengals want the same type of running back that they coveted back in 2009. With Gruden's new offensive system, Bush may not be the fit that they are looking for. Though Bush did have career highs in carries and yards, he only averaged 3.8 yards per carry on the season. However, he did have a surprising 37 receptions on the season with an 11.3 average, and that's a facet to a running back's game that Gruden undoubtedly wants for 2012.
Though we may be grasping at straws a little bit here, it's important to note the cliche of "where there's smoke, there's a fire". Given the recent history here, don't be surprised if more rumors about this situation begin to surface between the Raiders and Bengals once again in 2012.
0 recs | 33 comments
I love the big bruising back
with a chance of pace back every once in a while…I’m going to be disappointed if the bengals switch to a smaller shifty RB system…I just dont think it can be successful in the AFV North division.
WhoDey14 - February 3, 2012
AFC North
Name one bruiser in division this year?
pray4gm11 - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Peyton Hillis
Bengalsfan024 - February 3, 2012
Crybabies don't count
Helmsy - February 3, 2012
How many games did he actually play?
He had one successful game against the Ravens and every other game he averaged under 4 ypc.
Mexal - February 3, 2012
Peyton is only as good as his D line
I think the best combination is Foster/Tate…Foster is not a bruiser but has some size…and tate is a little smaller…WE NEED SPEED…and size..just like Foster
ticalcaldwell - February 3, 2012
BUSH Sucks
2012 Nfl Draft
Bengals Pick 1a. Kirkpatrick
Pick 1b. Traded
Pick 2. Mark Barron
Pick 3.Traded with 1b for Forte, we sign him to a 5 yr 50mil deal
And Bengals kick ass on first 3 rounds on draft day. WHO
Diesel2405 - February 3, 2012
that would be nice... but without an OG forte wont be that good
Bengalsfan024 - February 3, 2012
forte will not be a fa
bears will franchise him if they can’t work out a contract. chicago has already stated they will.
palewook - February 3, 2012
Agree
pemci - February 3, 2012
Why did we trade a 1st & 3rd?
Joe Goodberry - February 4, 2012 via Android app
Sign Bush which would allow us to draft LaMichael James and let us use our early picks to shore up the d/oline…definitely interesting but I doubt we make a move on Bush – he is going to get more than the Bengals typically want to pay for a RB.
Would be a fun combo though…
can’t realistically think we would get Forte. May as well go after Adrian Peterson or Arian Foster too.
Bengalshopefull - February 3, 2012
LaMichael
this kid will get eaten for lunch in the AFC North…I am all for speed, but you need a little size…He is tiny, and not MJD tiny……
ticalcaldwell - February 3, 2012
Not much smaller than Pead
Oregonbengalsfan - February 3, 2012
he's 185 pounds.
palewook - February 3, 2012
Pead weighed in at 193 pounds
Oregonbengalsfan - February 3, 2012
I think Pead gets eaten for lunch too
Though he could be successful if he only rushes 8-10 times a game.
Mexal - February 3, 2012
willie parker wasn't all that big
and he was an every down back in the AFC north
ephram - February 3, 2012
he didn't last long either.
Bigcatdaddy - February 3, 2012 via Android app
agreed
but few RB’s last that long in the NFL. It’s rare to find a RB who sustains a high level of play beyond 3, 4, 5 seasons.
ephram - February 3, 2012
A 2 or 3 back system like the Saints have probably prolongs the shelf life of runningbacks.
DTFCPDX - February 3, 2012
What is that picture u got fella
njbengalstat - February 4, 2012
Saint Ephram
ephram - February 4, 2012
I wouldn't mind having James
as our screen pass back, or toss play back…he’d be our Darren Sproles.
Bengal4ever - February 4, 2012
At the right price
I would take Bush. I wouldnt over pay for him. He is a solid reciever but I would pair him with a faster back. I like McFadden but he is always hurt. I think you could draft Miller, who has similar skill set that would be cheaper.
EPK1979 - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Definitely would not be opposed to getting Bush...
Even for just 2-3 years, and still draft a RB as well. Maybe Pead, and take our time developing him more and getting him to Pro level status…
pemci - February 3, 2012
I want nothing to do with Bush
I’m tired of backs with no big play potential.
Mexal - February 3, 2012
Bengals would be nuts to sign a RB to an expensive contract
when the draft is fairly deep with RB’s and they’ll be cheap.
I’d rather see the Bengals use their scarce FA dollars on one starting OG , one starting CB’s, 1 nickel CB and 1 starting WR.
Then hit the draft for the RB’s at a fraction the price of a guy like Bush.
BENGALS69 - February 3, 2012
McFadden >>>> Bush
Bush is a slow, plodding RB whose YPC has dropped every year
McFadden is an absolute stud (when healthy)
ephram - February 3, 2012
And from what I'm heard from Raiders fans who I've talked to since the Carson Palmer trade...
McFadden has a fumbling problem which is why they’ve kept Bush around so long as their goal-line back because he’s much better at securing the football than DMC. Don’t get me wrong, I like McFadden, but his durability concerns me somewhat which is another reason why Bush has been there for so long playing behind McFadden when he has starter potential. Bush proved his value when he stepped up and helped carry their offense this year after McFadden went down and he is definitely a quality starting back in this league. McFadden strikes me as a Tiki Barber-type back with tremendous talent but also a penchant for coughing up the ball which Barber did eventually remedy later in his career. But I’d rather go with Bush, mainly because we have Bernard Scott as a shifty speed back to offset what Bush lacks in speed but possesses heavily in power and because I also don’t want to see any more backs with fumbling issues here (Benson, Chris Perry).
dstacify - February 3, 2012
Don't think we will take a back in FA
I’d say it’s 95% they draft a back in round 1 or 2 and stick with what they already have on there roster, excluding Cedric Benson
biggie22 - February 4, 2012
If we don't trade for
or sign a RB in free agency, we’d better draft one in the first round. I think a lot of people are assuming we can get a starting back in rounds 2-3. I don’t think that’s the case.
Shake n Blake - February 4, 2012
We need a RB like Micheal Bush
Bengal4ever - February 4, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Cincy Jungle to post a comment.