Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints
Shop Horizontal

Mark Ingram's Woes

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Originally Posted by SaintsBro I'm not taking a side on all the medical stuff, but ya'll are forgetting that in 2010 at the time of his injury, the Seattle loss and the Ingram pick, Pierre was also in a contract ...

Like Tree21Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-28-2012, 05:10 PM   #51
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 951
Blog Entries: 2
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by SaintsBro View Post
I'm not taking a side on all the medical stuff, but ya'll are forgetting that in 2010 at the time of his injury, the Seattle loss and the Ingram pick, Pierre was also in a contract year so it was completely uncertain whether he WOULD be back or not. His agent at the time was definitely making a bit of noise about wanting Pierre to get paid, so at the time of Bush leaving and the Ingram pick, there was no telling what would happen with Pierre's contract, even if his injury healed. Because you can never KNOW if you can resign someone until they sign. Just thought ya'll should include that in your discussion/argument, LOL.

Also Ivory had and still has a reputation for fumbling, so you can't put too many eggs in that basket in late 2010 when looking at the team's position needs, or running back vs. defensive picks. He's never quite "stuck" with the coaches, and been considered a reliable or go-to guy, for whatever reason.

Contine, as you were!
I'm afraid you missed something huge that I already pointed out. Before the draft, the Saints had already signed Pierre to a 4 year deal. There was no uncertainty whatsoever. Plus, it was pretty obvious that he was healing just fine considering the deal they gave him.
burningmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Latest Blogs
Landry over Beckham Jr. Last Blog: 04-12-2014 By: joker-saint


Saints Free Agency 2014 Last Blog: 03-11-2014 By: SmashMouth




Old 09-28-2012, 05:52 PM   #52
Truth Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort Alabama
Posts: 14,561
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by burningmetal View Post
I'm afraid you missed something huge that I already pointed out. Before the draft, the Saints had already signed Pierre to a 4 year deal. There was no uncertainty whatsoever. Plus, it was pretty obvious that he was healing just fine considering the deal they gave him.
We didn't miss your point, we just disagree that he was a sure thing to play in 2011. And even so that gave us ONE RB to depend on, and there was no guarantee that he'd be fully healed.

So again, RB was a need.
Danno is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2012, 06:04 PM   #53
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 951
Blog Entries: 2
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by Danno View Post
We didn't miss your point, we just disagree that he was a sure thing to play in 2011. And even so that gave us ONE RB to depend on, and there was no guarantee that he'd be fully healed.

So again, RB was a need.
Did you read the post I was replying to? He said we should discuss the fact that Pierre was in a contract year, but I had already mentioned that Pierre was signed before the draft. I was speaking directly to him.

Now you can disagree with me all you want, but look at the results. I said it then, and I'm still saying that he was a bad choice. The Saints under Sean Payton will always be a RB by committee, because that's how his system works. You don't waste a first round pick on a committee player when you are starving for a pass rusher or a linebacker who can actually run with TE's and RB's, as the Saints were.

That is my opinion, and I see nothing to suggest it isn't a valid one, but say what you will.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
burningmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2012, 06:22 PM   #54
Truth Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort Alabama
Posts: 14,561
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by burningmetal View Post
Now you can disagree with me all you want, but look at the results.
Results have nothing to do with the fact that RB was a need when we picked him, but say what you will.
Danno is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2012, 02:13 AM   #55
100th Post
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 275
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by CharityMike View Post
I don't really agree with this. This is the same argument that was ongoing when Bush was here. You could say "we are not a running team" if NONE of our backs did well. PT consistently gets yards. He can run any route, up the gut off tackle, pitch or sweep. Sprloes can do the same as well. The problem is Ingram needs more time. Some RB's take more time to aclimated to the speed of the NFL. Bush is prime example.
That's what I'm saying :P
Cory9289 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 05:49 AM   #56
500th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 951
Blog Entries: 2
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Originally Posted by Danno View Post
Results have nothing to do with the fact that RB was a need when we picked him, but say what you will.
The results show that we didn't need any RB's. You assumed it was a need. There were greater needs, it's very simple.

And don't misunderstand me, I totally get the whole 'you can never have too many RB's' line in theory. I get that there was at least a chance that these guys wouldn't come back fully healthy. But unfortunately there are only so many roster spots to be had, and we needed to upgrade the weakness of our team. Even with no RB's, our offense is better than most, usually. Not as good obviously, but still good enough to win if we could ever have a solid defense.

Right now we have all of our weapons and we still can't beat anybody because the whole team is in a funk. But that's a whole different story.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
burningmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 07:31 AM   #57
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Grand Haven, Michigan by way of a little Mississippi River town in Louisiana
Posts: 2,436
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Personally I wanted LeShoure out of Illinoise but Ingram is not a bad pick , if he could line up with Ivory they would keep the D in tight and send our recievers seeing alot of one on one action and each time the D loosened up send Ivory or Ingram to smash it down their throat. We are a pass happy team there is no doubt about that but at 0-3 or 4 we may need to become a manage team for the rest of the season until Payton gets back and fixes this mess that we have become. Bet he is getting a good look at this mess and looking at college players for the draft alreasdy. The Packers had Laumbardi way back when, we have Payton which I feel is todays Packs old coach. This season is a good wake up call for all to see who actually is the face of this team.
halloween 65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 08:18 AM   #58
Truth Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort Alabama
Posts: 14,561
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Fumbles, versatility, and pass protection.

Mark is better than Ivory at all 3.
Danno is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 08:35 AM   #59
500th Post
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 626
Re: Mark Ingram's Woes

Bottom line is he came out of college overrated and we bought high. Now is the time to sell before he gets too low. The guy is our 4th best back and cost us a rd 1 pick
voodooido is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://blackandgold.com/saints/51017-mark-ingrams-woes.html
Posted By For Type Date Hits
Mark Ingram's Woes This thread Refback 09-27-2012 08:22 AM 5


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts