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.

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.

Now you can disagree with me all you want, but look at the results.

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.

Results have nothing to do with the fact that RB was a need when we picked him, but say what you will.