Anyone disappointed with Ingram?

QBREES9 · 11-10-2011, 11:44 AM

Oh god no it's his rookie year.

st thomas · 11-10-2011, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by strato

Oh..and i didn't read the article..

i'm not reading it either strat, i refuse to give jokers like that any props for something that makes no sense, i have no regrets about picking ingram in the draft and if the guy had 20+ carries a game would put him with elite rookies, its mambo jumbo yak smack jack. one bad step and he gets hurt heck it happens to the best.

Cruize · 11-10-2011, 12:32 PM

Nope.

st thomas · 11-10-2011, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by Crusader

I'm only disappointed that he hasn't been used more. IMHO Ingram is the type of back that needs 20-25 or even 30 carries a game to be effective. He'll grind and grind and grind and then eventualy break a long one.

u can say that again crusader, keep feeding it to him till something breaks. just don't let him jump. lol ivory on the other hand would'nt hold up with to many carries

SapperSaint · 11-10-2011, 03:01 PM

I really don't see how anyone can justify disapointment in Ingram. My Lord, when your teams has...

1. PT
2. Darren Sproles (Who, by the way is out there just about every play)
and
3. Chris Ivory (Now)

Mark is not going to get 20 touches a game. I think he has done just fine his rookie year.

Euphoria · 11-10-2011, 03:57 PM

I just think its really stupid to judge a rookie.

You have to give them time to learn and adjust to the faster game. RB is maybe the one of the easiest to adapt to but sometimes its harder to see the field early on because so much is being thrown at you that you have tunnel vision when you are running the play.

Give him 2-3 years before we start talking about this.

Kryptonite · 11-10-2011, 04:28 PM

Like it's been stated here before, our offensive designed/scheme isn't geared for a pro bowl back. It's just not going to happen. I'm only disappointed in his usage and play calling that's it. Not able to get in the endzone in the GB game? Hell, we've sucked at that even in '09. Remember, the SB? We couldn't get it in then either. Defenses get too good of a push on our O line. Everytime! I was kind of surprise though that they would trade up to get a RB with such great potential. IMHO, his skills and value will never be realize playing for Payton. Nothing wrong with that from a Saints fan standpoint. Just wonder how he's going to fell about it in 2 yrs.

Memnoch_TP · 11-10-2011, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by jeanpierre

Dude, you made a great point about the Saints needing a running back in the draft - don't back down...

I'm not backing down. Taking Ingram in the draft was the smart thing to do. It just didn't end up being the right thing to do.

The dealer was showing 6, we doubled down on a 10. We drew an 8 and the dealer flipped a king and drew a 4.

Originally Posted by papz

From a fantasy perspective, he's been disappointing only for those who overrated and over drafted him. I saw people take him as early as the end of the 3rd round and his ranking was right around the 5th round... which was absurd. As you pointed out, in the type of offense we run and the constant rotation of personnel, he was a big gamble and risk to produce anywhere close to tier 2 RB production. If one was thinking with his head on straight, that's not where you gamble that early in a fantasy draft.

That is exactly what I'm saying Papz. Really, the only reason to draft Ingram in a fantasy league would be as a late round flier in a keeper league.

Originally Posted by Euphoria

I just think its really stupid to judge a rookie.

You have to give them time to learn and adjust to the faster game. RB is maybe the one of the easiest to adapt to but sometimes its harder to see the field early on because so much is being thrown at you that you have tunnel vision when you are running the play.

Give him 2-3 years before we start talking about this.

No.

papz · 11-10-2011, 08:32 PM

I agree it was the smart thing to do. We had him very high on our draft board and to get him where we did... we did a great job. In landing two top 15 type talents is a A+ in my book... especially being that our first round pick next season will be at the tailend of the round. I only thing I disagree with you here is saying it ended up not being the right thing to do... only time can tell on that one.

Now whether we needed to draft a back or not is a whole different story.

Memnoch_TP · 11-10-2011, 10:24 PM

Alright then, I will say it wasn't the right thing to do in the short term. We'll see on the long term.

11-10-2011, 12:12 PM	#42
st thomas Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: lafayette Posts: 7,753	Originally Posted by strato Oh..and i didn't read the article.. i'm not reading it either strat, i refuse to give jokers like that any props for something that makes no sense, i have no regrets about picking ingram in the draft and if the guy had 20+ carries a game would put him with elite rookies, its mambo jumbo yak smack jack. one bad step and he gets hurt heck it happens to the best.

11-10-2011, 12:32 PM	#43
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,457	Nope.
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,457

11-10-2011, 12:49 PM	#44
st thomas Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: lafayette Posts: 7,753	Originally Posted by Crusader I'm only disappointed that he hasn't been used more. IMHO Ingram is the type of back that needs 20-25 or even 30 carries a game to be effective. He'll grind and grind and grind and then eventualy break a long one. u can say that again crusader, keep feeding it to him till something breaks. just don't let him jump. lol ivory on the other hand would'nt hold up with to many carries

11-10-2011, 07:47 PM	#48
Memnoch_TP Logic Troll Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Southern Louisiana Posts: 565	Originally Posted by jeanpierre Dude, you made a great point about the Saints needing a running back in the draft - don't back down... I'm not backing down. Taking Ingram in the draft was the smart thing to do. It just didn't end up being the right thing to do. The dealer was showing 6, we doubled down on a 10. We drew an 8 and the dealer flipped a king and drew a 4. Originally Posted by papz From a fantasy perspective, he's been disappointing only for those who overrated and over drafted him. I saw people take him as early as the end of the 3rd round and his ranking was right around the 5th round... which was absurd. As you pointed out, in the type of offense we run and the constant rotation of personnel, he was a big gamble and risk to produce anywhere close to tier 2 RB production. If one was thinking with his head on straight, that's not where you gamble that early in a fantasy draft. That is exactly what I'm saying Papz. Really, the only reason to draft Ingram in a fantasy league would be as a late round flier in a keeper league. Originally Posted by Euphoria I just think its really stupid to judge a rookie. You have to give them time to learn and adjust to the faster game. RB is maybe the one of the easiest to adapt to but sometimes its harder to see the field early on because so much is being thrown at you that you have tunnel vision when you are running the play. Give him 2-3 years before we start talking about this. No.

11-10-2011, 08:32 PM	#49
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,753	I agree it was the smart thing to do. We had him very high on our draft board and to get him where we did... we did a great job. In landing two top 15 type talents is a A+ in my book... especially being that our first round pick next season will be at the tailend of the round. I only thing I disagree with you here is saying it ended up not being the right thing to do... only time can tell on that one. Now whether we needed to draft a back or not is a whole different story.
	Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. All little common sense goes a long way.

11-10-2011, 11:44 AM	#41
QBREES9 Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New Haven Ct Posts: 23,985	Oh god no it's his rookie year.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

11-10-2011, 03:01 PM	#45
SapperSaint Pink Nightmare Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 3,028 Blog Entries: 7	I really don't see how anyone can justify disapointment in Ingram. My Lord, when your teams has... 1. PT 2. Darren Sproles (Who, by the way is out there just about every play) and 3. Chris Ivory (Now) Mark is not going to get 20 touches a game. I think he has done just fine his rookie year.

11-10-2011, 03:57 PM	#46
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	I just think its really stupid to judge a rookie. You have to give them time to learn and adjust to the faster game. RB is maybe the one of the easiest to adapt to but sometimes its harder to see the field early on because so much is being thrown at you that you have tunnel vision when you are running the play. Give him 2-3 years before we start talking about this.

11-10-2011, 04:28 PM	#47
Kryptonite DAMMIT BOY! Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Crestview, FL via S'port LA Posts: 197	Like it's been stated here before, our offensive designed/scheme isn't geared for a pro bowl back. It's just not going to happen. I'm only disappointed in his usage and play calling that's it. Not able to get in the endzone in the GB game? Hell, we've sucked at that even in '09. Remember, the SB? We couldn't get it in then either. Defenses get too good of a push on our O line. Everytime! I was kind of surprise though that they would trade up to get a RB with such great potential. IMHO, his skills and value will never be realize playing for Payton. Nothing wrong with that from a Saints fan standpoint. Just wonder how he's going to fell about it in 2 yrs.

11-10-2011, 10:24 PM	#50
Memnoch_TP Logic Troll Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Southern Louisiana Posts: 565	Alright then, I will say it wasn't the right thing to do in the short term. We'll see on the long term.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/37957-anyone-disappointed-ingram.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Anyone disappointed with Ingram?	This thread	Refback	11-09-2011 06:05 PM	3