They had me after Emmitt...

http://www.nndb.com/people/558/00002...th-1-sized.jpg

I would not hesitate to take him in the second... but he just isn't for me in the first round. I just can't wrap my head around this selection no matter which angle I look at it. =/

[quote=strato;293916]Our defense outshined our offense last year and I personally have zero faith that Ivory can stay healthy since he hasn't for 5 straight years and I think its pretty clear now that Bush isn't a running back.

We have Pierre Thomas and no one else, and even PT has a few question marks.

I agree with Danno. Ingram is a no brainer. We can get defense in the later rounds and FAcy.

we don't have a RB that can play more than 10 games. We need a RB.

While I don't think it's 100% given that we bring Bush back, both sides seem to want to get a deal worked out. I do think they'll get something done and he'll be in a Saints uni next year if we have a season. With that said...

Would you (this is to everyone not just Danno) still be in favor of selecting Ingram with our first round pick knowing that Bush, PT, and Ivory are all on the roster for the next few years?

Absolutely. Ivory hasn't proved anything other than he runs really hard and has gotten hurt in every game he's ever played in.

Bush isn't a RB, but a decent change of pace scat back.

PT is a pretty solid RB.

Let's look at our RB situation....

• Bush can't finish a run much less a season.
• Ivory injury history goes back to college.
• PT's injury may have been a fluke last year.

Answer this question... are any of the RBs tradable? Didn't think so.
Adding Ingram to this group is a no brainer.

Ingram makes every player on the offense better.
A healthy running game keeps the defense off the field.
We would have never won the SB without a healthy PT & Bush.
You can never have enough RBs. Last year proved that.

I'd love a DL or LB but are we going to pass on Eddie George for Alex Molden again? :???:

I bet if we don't take him, the Pats aren't stupid to pass on him.

I don't want O necessarily, but if an A-plus offensive player is there at 24, and nothing but B-minus defensive players, we'd be idiots to pick defense.

Teams that reach usually end up picking very high in the draft year after year.

My answer to that would be yes. The Patriots were interested in PT last season... and with the reasonable(cheap in my opinion) contract he signed last season, it shouldn't deter any team from trading for him. Though fragile, Ivory is cheap and productive. So yes... he absolutely is tradeable. Bush at a reduced rate around 3 million a year, should garner interest also. Discounting whether or not he's produces the field, his name generates a lot of revenue.

So yea... all three have value and are tradeable.

Taking a Von Miller, Dareus, Robert Quinn at 24 would be a no-brainer. If Ingram is there at 24, it's only a discussion.

Not if he doesn't get the snaps... which personally is my main sticking point for not taking him there at 24.

Let's not forget Ingram has his own question marks and concerns about his health... and the knee being the culprit. I agree you can never have enough running backs but with that said, there are other avenues that we can explore finding another back... not regulated to our first round pick.

If we're going to pass on Mark Ingram, then we would be passing on Mark Ingram. Not Eddie George... not Emmitt Smith. Let's not give the kid that much credit just yet.

Given that the two backs on their roster now is BGE and Danny Woodhead, it would be pretty stupid to not take a back in the draft. That doesn't necessarily mean it has to be with their first pick or that it has to be Mark Ingram. Guys like Mikel Leshoure and Ryan Williams are both quite talented that could be better value for them if they want to address their need at OLB and DE.