Register All Albums FAQ Community Experience
Go Back   New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

Saints don’t think Mark Ingram will be 100 percent when camp starts

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Originally Posted by burningmetal If you believe it's "crap" that some of us, such as myself, said we were crowded or loaded at RB, then consider this: We finished 6th in the league in rushing yards per game. Our leading ...

Like Tree7Likes

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 05-17-2012, 08:18 AM   #14
Truth Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R)
Posts: 24,758
Originally Posted by burningmetal View Post
If you believe it's "crap" that some of us, such as myself, said we were crowded or loaded at RB, then consider this: We finished 6th in the league in rushing yards per game. Our leading rusher was Darren Sproles with 603 yards... On only 87 carries (That still boggles my mind). When you are 6th in the entire league in rushing and your leading rusher only has 603 yards, it means a lot of guys are contributing. They were all hurt the year before, but they all came back - with the exception of Bush being traded, but obviously we replaced him nicely - and played very well.

Ivory had 374 yards and averaged 4.7 per carry.
Thomas had 562 yards and averaged 5.1
Sproles, as mentioned, had 603 yards and averaged 6.9
Ingram had 474 yards and averaged 3.9.... If he weren't on the team, the other three could have easily picked up the slack, and did just that when he missed all those games.

Then you add the forgotten man in all this, Joique Bell, who was the most impressive RB in camp, but didn't make the cut, and that sounds like a pretty crowded backfield. I'm all for depth, but they gave Pierre a pretty hefty deal for a guy coming off injury, so they obviously had faith in him. Then came the Sproles Signing after drafting Ingram. I loved the Sproles sign, and obviously it turned out even better than we could have imagined, but it makes the Ingram pick in the middle seem pretty weird. You don't usually draft for depth in the first round. But they sure did that time.

You aren't comprehending. At the time we drafted Ingram, we were not loaded at RB.

Again, and again, and again...

No one knew if Ivory would ever play another down of NFL football,

PT missed 11 games with an ankle injury, and then had surgery on it,

Everyone knew Bush was gone.

We did not have Darren Sproles.

We had one healthy RB on the roster with potential, and he was claimed off of another team's practice squad.

So yes, claiming we were loaded at RB when we drafted Ingram is what I call "crap". Actually I'd call it something else but our word filters would asterisk it.
Rugby Saint II likes this.
Danno is offline  
 


Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts