Saints are just Stupid for trading up for Ingram (2 Viewers)

[jacobo_moses]

So the Saints gave up this for Mark Ingram

Saints traded up with the Patriots to select Alabama RB Mark Ingram with the No. 28 overall pick in the 2011 NFL draft. The Saints surrender the No. 56 pick and next year's first-rounder. GM Mickey Loomis flies under the radar, but he's been as successful as any NFL exec the past few years. After picking up Ingram and Cam Jordan, he's putting his eggs in the Super Bowl basket once again. The farthest the top running back has ever fallen in the common era draft, Ingram figures to battle Pierre Thomas for the lead-back role as a rookie. More than any coach in the league, Sean Payton mixes and matches his backfield based on situation. At the very least, Ingram figures to be the primary between-the-tackles runner and short-yardage back. Short-term, the Saints' backfield figures to remain a fantasy quagmire. Long-term, the values of Thomas and Chris Ivory are in the tank.

So they gave up the 2nd Rnd Pick that year and their future 1st (2012 1st) for what? Ingram was given like 10 to 14 carries most games (which makes it near impossible to get into a groove.) He just seemed to be a non factor most games. Lets be honest with Ivory, and PT and Sproles. They don't need INgram really. Yes I know Sproles came to the team after Ingram was drafted. But still. It just seems like the SAINTS are stupid to give up all that and use Ingram like they have. I mean my hell when the Saints scored like 60 plus points or something like that vs the Colts. Ingram didn't have 1 Touchdown. I mean give me a freaking break. :(

 

[Abraham]

Ok.

 

[Zeff]

You're a bitter Ingram Dyn Owner.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

A. They didn't know they were going to get Sproles.

B. Thomas and Ivory are extremely injury-prone.

C. The Saints first-round pick was almost certain to be a low one anyway.

It was a calculated risk. Thomas stayed healthy for the first time in his career and Sproles ended up playing a much larger role as a conventional back than they thought he would.

I am not a huge fan of Ingram but for what he was asked to do, he did a good job. At the time of his injury he was statistically the top running back in the NFL in short-yardage situations. There's nothing saying that he won't still have a very good career. You just have to temper expectations because he will always be in a time share.

 

[cobalt_27]

You know, if you always evaluate a team's moves based on first year production, many of them look ill-advised. So Ingram was a non-factor last year. Big deal. What we don't know is what future production they will need from him. They may have hoped for Sproles' production, but there was no certainty that he would come in and produce the way he did. Ivory and Thomas are just a couple of JAGs, who can and will be replaced if they find better production elsewhere.

Ingram, in theory, brings a legit 3-down back, who could have a long, successful career. We'll see. But, this is the problem with fantasy owners evaluating how a team makes personnel decisions; teams don't construct themselves every year in a redraft format. This isn't a one-year vacuum.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

Agreed. Let's check back after year 3 and see if this observation is still valid.

 

[PewterFan]

Not many of us thought it was stupid a year ago. Even after they got Sproles most of us were impressed with their offensive unit. Looking back, however, the Saints would've been better off drafting one of those stud Linebackers.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Ivory hits the hole much harder than Ingram.

For someone that had a fast 10 second split at the combine, I thought he looked very slow to the hole.

You can never have enough RB depth, but JMO Ingram was a distant 4th best RB on the Saints.

 

[super sleeper]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

 

[Skeletore Eh]

I think this is reality vs fantasy. As a previous person mentioned, Ingram was among the league leaders in short yardage situations. He was useful to the saints as a guy that could convert on third or fourth and short. Obviously he was pretty useless in fantasy but that doesn't have anything to do with his effectiveness for the saints.

 

[Multiple Scores]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

 

[Couch Potato]

Let's see.. the Saints signed Drew Brees in 2006 despite recovering from a serious shoulder injury, while Miami was too fearful and went with Culpepper instead. Oops. Then the Saints drafted Colston in the 7th round and had the balls to start him week 1 as a rookie, something almost no team would have the guts to do. They added undrafted Pierre Thomas in 2007 and he's been very productive when healthy. They drafted "project" TE Graham in 2010 and all he did was break TE records in his 2nd year. They added Sproles this year on a very reasonable 4 yr / 14 mil deal and all he did was 87 catches, 1300 rushing/receiving yards, 1400 return yards, and 10 total TDs.

Yeah, this team is just stupid when it comes to choosing offensive players. Stupid effing great.

So, when Ingram didn't show he was all-world superstar walk-on-water fantastic in the first 7 games of his career (he was either out injured or gimpy the rest of the season), obviously the Saints have no idea what they are doing. Right. Gotcha. Glad you know better than they do how things are.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Let's see.. the Saints signed Drew Brees in 2006 despite recovering from a serious shoulder injury, while Miami was too fearful and went with Culpepper instead. Oops. Then the Saints drafted Colston in the 7th round and had the balls to start him week 1 as a rookie, something almost no team would have the guts to do. They added undrafted Pierre Thomas in 2007 and he's been very productive when healthy. They drafted "project" TE Graham in 2010 and all he did was break TE records in his 2nd year. They added Sproles this year on a very reasonable 4 yr / 14 mil deal and all he did was 87 catches, 1300 rushing/receiving yards, 1400 return yards, and 10 total TDs.

Yeah, this team is just stupid when it comes to choosing offensive players. Stupid effing great.

So, when Ingram didn't show he was all-world superstar walk-on-water fantastic in the first 7 games of his career (he was either out injured or gimpy the rest of the season), obviously the Saints have no idea what they are doing. Right. Gotcha. Glad you know better than they do how things are.

That almost made me cry with pride. Some just got

 

[Couch Potato]

Let's see.. the Saints signed Drew Brees in 2006 despite recovering from a serious shoulder injury, while Miami was too fearful and went with Culpepper instead. Oops. Then the Saints drafted Colston in the 7th round and had the balls to start him week 1 as a rookie, something almost no team would have the guts to do. They added undrafted Pierre Thomas in 2007 and he's been very productive when healthy. They drafted "project" TE Graham in 2010 and all he did was break TE records in his 2nd year. They added Sproles this year on a very reasonable 4 yr / 14 mil deal and all he did was 87 catches, 1300 rushing/receiving yards, 1400 return yards, and 10 total TDs.

Yeah, this team is just stupid when it comes to choosing offensive players. Stupid effing great.

So, when Ingram didn't show he was all-world superstar walk-on-water fantastic in the first 7 games of his career (he was either out injured or gimpy the rest of the season), obviously the Saints have no idea what they are doing. Right. Gotcha. Glad you know better than they do how things are.

That almost made me cry with pride. Some just got

Hi Chuck! :wave:I like Jacobo. He's a good guy, always contributes to the board, but sometimes... dunno... the thinking cap ain't always on.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Let's see.. the Saints signed Drew Brees in 2006 despite recovering from a serious shoulder injury, while Miami was too fearful and went with Culpepper instead. Oops. Then the Saints drafted Colston in the 7th round and had the balls to start him week 1 as a rookie, something almost no team would have the guts to do. They added undrafted Pierre Thomas in 2007 and he's been very productive when healthy. They drafted "project" TE Graham in 2010 and all he did was break TE records in his 2nd year. They added Sproles this year on a very reasonable 4 yr / 14 mil deal and all he did was 87 catches, 1300 rushing/receiving yards, 1400 return yards, and 10 total TDs.

Yeah, this team is just stupid when it comes to choosing offensive players. Stupid effing great.

So, when Ingram didn't show he was all-world superstar walk-on-water fantastic in the first 7 games of his career (he was either out injured or gimpy the rest of the season), obviously the Saints have no idea what they are doing. Right. Gotcha. Glad you know better than they do how things are.

That almost made me cry with pride. Some just got

Hi Chuck! :wave:I like Jacobo. He's a good guy, always contributes to the board, but sometimes... dunno... the thinking cap ain't always on.

Not so quick. Maybe my reading comprehension needs work but what I took from the comments was the Saints were stupid for drafting "Ingram". I took the comments as having a problem with that one move by itself and it has validity because up to this point in time it appears to be a mistake. I have no crystal ball so I can't see the future but his comments ring true at this moment. To me it seems you manipulated his comments into saying the Saints have no clue about acquiring offensive players where I thought he was saying drafting Ingram was a mistake. If you can highlight where the OP spoke of Brees, Colston, Graham,etc; please do so because I can't locate it.

 

[az_prof]

Ivory hits the hole much harder than Ingram.For someone that had a fast 10 second split at the combine, I thought he looked very slow to the hole.You can never have enough RB depth, but JMO Ingram was a distant 4th best RB on the Saints.

Let's remember that the rookies had a very short off season, with no OTAs. That must have slowed development for some. DMac didn't look so good his first couple of years. Thomas Jones looked like a total bust his first three years in AZ. It is too early to judge Ingram or the Saint's moves. As others have said, the Saints didn't know they would get Sproles. The fact that FA happened after the draft, instead of before, no doubt screwed up the draft for a lot of teams. Maybe the Saints don't make that move if they had locked up Sproles before the draft. Hard to say.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Ivory hits the hole much harder than Ingram.



For someone that had a fast 10 second split at the combine, I thought he looked very slow to the hole.

You can never have enough RB depth, but JMO Ingram was a distant 4th best RB on the Saints.

Same split as Glen Coffee and Javon Ringer

 

[johnb]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

 

[Couch Potato]

Let's see.. the Saints signed Drew Brees in 2006 despite recovering from a serious shoulder injury, while Miami was too fearful and went with Culpepper instead. Oops. Then the Saints drafted Colston in the 7th round and had the balls to start him week 1 as a rookie, something almost no team would have the guts to do. They added undrafted Pierre Thomas in 2007 and he's been very productive when healthy. They drafted "project" TE Graham in 2010 and all he did was break TE records in his 2nd year. They added Sproles this year on a very reasonable 4 yr / 14 mil deal and all he did was 87 catches, 1300 rushing/receiving yards, 1400 return yards, and 10 total TDs.

Yeah, this team is just stupid when it comes to choosing offensive players. Stupid effing great.

So, when Ingram didn't show he was all-world superstar walk-on-water fantastic in the first 7 games of his career (he was either out injured or gimpy the rest of the season), obviously the Saints have no idea what they are doing. Right. Gotcha. Glad you know better than they do how things are.

That almost made me cry with pride. Some just got

Hi Chuck! :wave:I like Jacobo. He's a good guy, always contributes to the board, but sometimes... dunno... the thinking cap ain't always on.

Not so quick. Maybe my reading comprehension needs work but what I took from the comments was the Saints were stupid for drafting "Ingram". I took the comments as having a problem with that one move by itself and it has validity because up to this point in time it appears to be a mistake. I have no crystal ball so I can't see the future but his comments ring true at this moment. To me it seems you manipulated his comments into saying the Saints have no clue about acquiring offensive players where I thought he was saying drafting Ingram was a mistake. If you can highlight where the OP spoke of Brees, Colston, Graham,etc; please do so because I can't locate it.

I think that the Saints have earned the benefit of the doubt, and that those who would suggest they can make any sort of determination after 7 healthy games at the start of his rookie year are way premature in their criticisms and need to learn a little patience.

 

[Perfect Tommy]

The OP didn't even say the Saints were stupid for drafting Ingram. He said they were stupid for trading up. I couldn't agree more. Next year's 1st rounder at the time was likely to be a late pick, but not later than the 28th pick they received. And it was quite possible it would be much higher than the 28th pick. So they gave up a superior pick for this year's draft plus a 2nd rounder last year. They weren't in a win or bust mode. In fact, stupid is exactly the right word. There was simply no reason to give up that kind of value.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

So you think Ingram has as much talent or athletic ability as a prospect? That's how I took it...not NFL production.

 

[Donnybrook]

It going to be interesting to see what the Patriots yield from the Ingram trade. Shane Vereen and this years #27. I am not a fan of trading away future picks but it still might work out OK for the Saints.

 

[johnb]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

So you think Ingram has as much talent or athletic ability as a prospect? That's how I took it...not NFL production.

I don't know and I'm not afraid to say that. I actually thought he looked pretty good in the few games I saw the Saints play this year, but it's such a small sample size I'm not confident to say one way or another. My point is that it's way too early to call this move a mistake or not. That's just my opinion though. I just think it's rather early to say he's not comparable to anyone, especially a guy like DMC who people were writing off just as quickly after his lack of show but now are ready to kiss his feet.

 

[comfortably numb]

Remember when the Giants overpaid for Eli Manning?

Give it a another year or so

 

[jacobo_moses]

The OP didn't even say the Saints were stupid for drafting Ingram. He said they were stupid for trading up. I couldn't agree more. Next year's 1st rounder at the time was likely to be a late pick, but not later than the 28th pick they received. And it was quite possible it would be much higher than the 28th pick. So they gave up a superior pick for this year's draft plus a 2nd rounder last year. They weren't in a win or bust mode. In fact, stupid is exactly the right word. There was simply no reason to give up that kind of value.

Exactly my point of this post. With how little they used Mark Ingram for what they paid for him and touted him in the Pre-Season time so highly. It just doesn't make sense. I just don't get it.

 

[cobalt_27]

The OP didn't even say the Saints were stupid for drafting Ingram. He said they were stupid for trading up. I couldn't agree more. Next year's 1st rounder at the time was likely to be a late pick, but not later than the 28th pick they received. And it was quite possible it would be much higher than the 28th pick. So they gave up a superior pick for this year's draft plus a 2nd rounder last year. They weren't in a win or bust mode. In fact, stupid is exactly the right word. There was simply no reason to give up that kind of value.

Exactly my point of this post. With how little they used Mark Ingram for what they paid for him and touted him in the Pre-Season time so highly. It just doesn't make sense. I just don't get it.

You don't get it because your bitterness is clouding your reasoning and judgment. Take a deep breath. Inhale. Exhale. Let it go and have a little sack and a little patience. The whining about it sort of doesn't do much...except expose you as a whiner.

 

[comfortably numb]

The OP didn't even say the Saints were stupid for drafting Ingram. He said they were stupid for trading up. I couldn't agree more. Next year's 1st rounder at the time was likely to be a late pick, but not later than the 28th pick they received. And it was quite possible it would be much higher than the 28th pick. So they gave up a superior pick for this year's draft plus a 2nd rounder last year. They weren't in a win or bust mode. In fact, stupid is exactly the right word. There was simply no reason to give up that kind of value.

Exactly my point of this post. With how little they used Mark Ingram for what they paid for him and touted him in the Pre-Season time so highly. It just doesn't make sense. I just don't get it.

Had they KNOWN they would sign Sproles 4 months later, and had they KNOWN he would have been such an intricate part of the offense, they probably don't trade up is my guess?this sounds like after the 2003 season...Why did the Arizona Cardinals waste the 17th pick with Bryant Johnson when they had Boldin at the end of the 2nd RD.

 

[flranger]

Guys, they gave up "this guy" http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/VereSh00-3.php and this years first which is nearly the same pick for him. I don't think it was that much of a gamble.

Two great guards and a very efficient QB, plus having a very talented RB locked up for four years. What's not to like. Pierre will be gone this year and guessing Ivory will go the following.

 

[Donnybrook]

Guys, they gave up "this guy" http://subscribers.f.../VereSh00-3.php and this years first which is nearly the same pick for him. I don't think it was that much of a gamble.

Two great guards and a very efficient QB, plus having a very talented RB locked up for four years. What's not to like. Pierre will be gone this year and guessing Ivory will go the following.

Why would you say this? He under contract for 3 more years.

 

[jacobo_moses]

Guys, they gave up "this guy" http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/VereSh00-3.php and this years first which is nearly the same pick for him. I don't think it was that much of a gamble.

Two great guards and a very efficient QB, plus having a very talented RB locked up for four years. What's not to like. Pierre will be gone this year and guessing Ivory will go the following.

Yeah I'm confused on that as well. Is PT going to be traded or do you know something we don't know.

 

[flranger]

My bad. I didn't know he re-signed. Flame away.

 

[humpback]

Guys, they gave up "this guy" http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/VereSh00-3.php and this years first which is nearly the same pick for him. I don't think it was that much of a gamble.

Two great guards and a very efficient QB, plus having a very talented RB locked up for four years. What's not to like. Pierre will be gone this year and guessing Ivory will go the following.

No, they gave up pick #56 and this years first. NE used the pick on Vereen, but it could have also been used on guys like Torrey Smith, Greg Little, DeMarco Murray, or any of the other players drafted 56th or later.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

This thread would have had a lot more punch had it been dated somewhere between

last season's NFL draft and opening game, as opposed to Jan 28, 2011.

 

[identikit]

This thread would have had a lot more punch had it been dated somewhere between

last season's NFL draft and opening game, as opposed to Jan 28, 2011.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

This thread would have had a lot more punch had it been dated somewhere between

last season's NFL draft and opening game, as opposed to Jan 28, 2011.

errrrrrr...

That would have been Nostradamus like.

 

[rockaction]

Oh, Mark Ingram. Ugh. When everyone was describing his best quality as "vision," and noted -- before the draft -- that he lacked explosiveness, and you couple that with the fact that he got hurt this year (again), and that Belichick and company completely passed on him with a pressing RB need and went with Vereen and Ridley instead, then yeah, it's safe to begin to question that personnel decision by the Saints (defense, anyone?) or at the very least be worried if you're counting on Ingram for fantasy football production. Especially given how Thomas and Sproles looked this year, both of whom (sorry to the podcast guys who lamented his non-use) looked light years better than Ingram whenever they touched the ball, while Ingram looked slow, even in garbage time or against lousy run defenses (like Carolina).

Ingram never passed the eye test, nor does it seem like he's ever passed the timed ones.

Bad combination.

 

[Multiple Scores]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

So you think Ingram is more talented or a better prospect or both than McFadden. All I said is he wasn't and you bash me, so answer the question if you have the cajones to.

 

[johnb]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

So you think Ingram is more talented or a better prospect or both than McFadden. All I said is he wasn't and you bash me, so answer the question if you have the cajones to.

1. I commented on 3 things. The fact that I felt it was much too early to judge and that fact that it was even funnier that DMC was used as a comparison given his track record of being called a bust really early. And of course that you trip over your legs running so quickly to every post to slug Ingram. I wasn't bashing you. I was telling the truth. 2. At what point did your post even remotely come close to answering the OP's question?3. It doesn't take cajones to post on a random message board. Geez. Chill out.

 

[Breesisdaman]

A. They didn't know they were going to get Sproles.B. Thomas and Ivory are extremely injury-prone.C. The Saints first-round pick was almost certain to be a low one anyway.It was a calculated risk. Thomas stayed healthy for the first time in his career and Sproles ended up playing a much larger role as a conventional back than they thought he would.I am not a huge fan of Ingram but for what he was asked to do, he did a good job. At the time of his injury he was statistically the top running back in the NFL in short-yardage situations. There's nothing saying that he won't still have a very good career. You just have to temper expectations because he will always be in a time share.

add to this the number of contracts that need to be done Brees, Colston, Nicks etc and not having to pay a first round draft pick this year.The Saints have done very well for themselves in later rounds so a first round pick is not always needed

 

[shader]

Let's see what happens this year. Not time to throw in the towel yet. I saw good things from Ingram.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Oh boy, it's the microwave society we live in today rearing it's ugly head again. Anyone born after 1980 wants INSTANT satisfaction.

 

[Doug B]

add to this the number of contracts that need to be done Brees, Colston, Nicks etc and not having to pay a first round draft pick this year.

The Saints have done very well for themselves in later rounds so a first round pick is not always needed

Ingram, out of the 28th slot, got a $3.89 million signing bonus. The 27th slot in 2012 is going to get around $4 million or so for a bonus. That's money that the 2012 Saints can use on bonuses for Brees and Nicks.

 

[Multiple Scores]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells is a better comparison.

You mean the same McFadden that has had one decent season in his 4 years?We get it. You hate Mark Ingram. Quite frankly, you may end up being right. But the level of effort you put into finding every post remotely related to the guy and bashing him is quite short-sighted. Saying he doesn't stack up to DMC after the guy has been through about 3/4 of a normal NFL schedule in his rookie year is hilarious. I don't think the Saints are dumb for trading up for the guy. Things change quick and he could fill a massive need for them at some point. Saying he's a turd is saying Saints management and coaching staff are turds too. I'll give them more credit than that until Ingram is out of the league.

So you think Ingram is more talented or a better prospect or both than McFadden. All I said is he wasn't and you bash me, so answer the question if you have the cajones to.

1. I commented on 3 things. The fact that I felt it was much too early to judge and that fact that it was even funnier that DMC was used as a comparison given his track record of being called a bust really early. And of course that you trip over your legs running so quickly to every post to slug Ingram. I wasn't bashing you. I was telling the truth. 2. At what point did your post even remotely come close to answering the OP's question?3. It doesn't take cajones to post on a random message board. Geez. Chill out.

You're one hostile person. I simply said he is not the talent or prospect of McFadden. Prospect - 4th overall vs 28th overall says what GMs think of them as prospects in addition to the entire scouting community. Talent - McFadden has had games of 170/3TDs. McFadden is a dual threat. McFadden averages well over 5ypc. McFadden takes it to the house from his own 30 often. Ingram isn't a dual threat like McFadden, I don't think he's capable of 170/3TDs in a game, I don't think he is capable of over 5ypc in a season. I don't own either player but to me it's clear McFadden was the better prospect coming out of college and also the more talented player. It's interesting you disagree.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

that's kind of funny considering I usually hear belichick was stupid to trade down.

 

[rockaction]

Oh boy, it's the microwave society we live in today rearing it's ugly head again. Anyone born after 1980 wants INSTANT satisfaction.

It has nothing to do with that. I was born a good amount before then, don't judge sports quickly, and just think Ingram has always looked slow and plodding. I'm reading the other comments, and out of thousands of adjectives and points to make about Ingram, the first words and points I see are those that I pretty much reached independently of any writers or scouts. So it's certainly not a pipe dream, nor an overreaction to a bad year. The love of Ingram from the day he left Alabama through this year is utterly perplexing. There's not a professional performance barometer in his admittedly short professional life that he can't meet. And if we were to use socio-psychological analysis as our guide to how Ingram happened we could use a statement like this:Oh boy, it's that bureaucratic, top-down screening mindset rearing its ugly head again. Anyone born before 1980 just has to have some sort of seal of approval based upon group-think consensus and pedigreed backing before they draft a slow, plodding running back based upon intangible and immeasurable qualities like "vision."

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Oh boy, it's the microwave society we live in today rearing it's ugly head again. Anyone born after 1980 wants INSTANT satisfaction.

It has nothing to do with that. I was born a good amount before then, don't judge sports quickly, and just think Ingram has always looked slow and plodding. I'm reading the other comments, and out of thousands of adjectives and points to make about Ingram, the first words and points I see are those that I pretty much reached independently of any writers or scouts. So it's certainly not a pipe dream, nor an overreaction to a bad year. The love of Ingram from the day he left Alabama through this year is utterly perplexing. There's not a professional performance barometer in his admittedly short professional life that he can't meet. And if we were to use socio-psychological analysis as our guide to how Ingram happened we could use a statement like this:Oh boy, it's that bureaucratic, top-down screening mindset rearing its ugly head again. Anyone born before 1980 just has to have some sort of seal of approval based upon group-think consensus and pedigreed backing before they draft a slow, plodding running back based upon intangible and immeasurable qualities like "vision."

 

[eNdblu]

I wonder if a similar thread will be created for Richardson if he doesn't put up 2000+ yards and 20+ TDs this season

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I wonder if a similar thread will be created for Richardson if he doesn't put up 2000+ yards and 20+ TDs this season

I hope owners trade me Justin Blackmon and Michael Flloyd for cheap after they have a rough first year.

 

[rockaction]

Oh boy, it's the microwave society we live in today rearing it's ugly head again. Anyone born after 1980 wants INSTANT satisfaction.

It has nothing to do with that. I was born a good amount before then, don't judge sports quickly, and just think Ingram has always looked slow and plodding. I'm reading the other comments, and out of thousands of adjectives and points to make about Ingram, the first words and points I see are those that I pretty much reached independently of any writers or scouts. So it's certainly not a pipe dream, nor an overreaction to a bad year. The love of Ingram from the day he left Alabama through this year is utterly perplexing. There's not a professional performance barometer in his admittedly short professional life that he can't meet. And if we were to use socio-psychological analysis as our guide to how Ingram happened we could use a statement like this:

Oh boy, it's that bureaucratic, top-down screening mindset rearing its ugly head again. Anyone born before 1980 just has to have some sort of seal of approval based upon group-think consensus and pedigreed backing before they draft a slow, plodding running back based upon intangible and immeasurable qualities like "vision."

Wow, and then I thought I missed your point and it was sarcasm. Heh. 4.62 and no explosion, doo da, doo da. But you just, uh, keep laughing. http://weasels.toonfur.com/imgs/toonp11.jpg



eta* I should clarify I am talking about pure football and the Saints, not fantasy, when I say "draft" and joke about the 80's thing. It's not personal in that respect.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

Oh boy, it's that bureaucratic, top-down screening mindset rearing its ugly head again. Anyone born before 1980 just has to have some sort of seal of approval based upon group-think consensus and pedigreed backing before they draft a slow, plodding running back based upon intangible and immeasurable qualities like "vision."

Ridiculous.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YSHw1wUvlIThe words "slow" and "plodding" hardly seem to fit. The highlights show that he has plenty enough acceleration. He is a Mack truck, not a sports car. What will make him a good NFL back is his leg drive, balance and yes "vision" (which is obvious enough from watching him cut back and bounce things to the outside) which can all be seen in the above video.Not saying he will be the greatest ever or anything like that. But don't use words like "slow" or "plodding" when he is clearly not.