Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Pete decided to change everything for this game and he did. He changed the winning strategy to a losing strategy.

I hope he changes it back.

I hate change.

Alaska

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

No it didn't.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Ivory looked like he was going to catch fire at times last night just to go sit down, I would have rode on his back the entire game then sub Ingram in for a breath or 2. In my opionion we have to many running backs and don't know what to do with them all, now someone can say thats not a bad thing but is it if you can't play them all properly, there are other positions that could definatly be addressed, I'm all for depth but damn!! I would play Sproles very sparingly, look, he's back and we get 60 yds, and when he's not 140 or so, figure it out, it's not working.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Hey danno, read the posts on the first page and see what we were talking about. The article was yet another attempt by a pundit to make us feel like we were wrong and we should start eating crow. Some of us know how to read between the lines when something is constantly being force-fed to us.

Then the DISCUSSION ensued below the article. One about how this crap is getting old. People can discuss whatever they want, and surely there have been other topics raised since then, but that is what myself and a couple other were talking about. Comprende? It's not that big a deal man.

And then you came in, and started your defense of Mark Ingram. It's cool though. I'm sure you'll try again to say I'm wrong about something with a three word sentence. I tried to peacefully end the argument a couple of posts ago, but apparently it was for naught. So here it goes one more time: I disagree with you whole heartedly, and I have more than explained my reasons why, and I think those reasons are legitimate. You see it a different way. There's nothing more to it than that. Moving on.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Simply put Ingram doen't fit the system and therefore he was a bad pick. According to Payton he drafted Ingram because he promised his son that he would. It's right there in his book.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Someone needs to tell Ingram to be decisive.
Year two, he is still running up peoples back and stopping his forward momentum.
He won't get a 2nd chance in the NFL to get going again.
Pick a gap, stick your head in it, and drive forward!
Learn how to be happy with 3 or 4 until something breaks for him.
Break it outside if it's all stacked up, but do it quickly.
He still seams to be cutting his big boy teeth.
I hope he gets there sooner rather than later.

Ever the optimist. Haters just keep on hating.

His body of work extends long before this training camp and he has proven he can play pretty darn well.

To me it's clear that we jumped on an opportunity to get Ingram in the draft so we took it and but now everyone is trying to post rationalize his credibility when the numbers don't merit it.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Ingram, ivory.......blah, blah just personal opinion you ride the hot hand ( ivory ) until his braids fall out. Have Ingram in behind him rest sproles and sell both Ingram, and ivory too the highest bidders for defensive help, and roll with pierre, sproles, cadet, and bring banyard out of rb barn!!!!!

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

He has not/was not worth the move up to draft him. Period.

The criticism for his production, however, should be shared with the coaches' utilization of his talents as well as those who decided to draft him as high as they did - especially when you consider the needs we had going in the draft that year for an impact player at DL, LB, DB, and OL...

While we needed RB depth, spending a R1 pick, especially the investment and added picks/trade to get him doesn't make since when you had the salary and committment to Brees and the passing game...

It would have made more since to draft Gabe Carimi, OT Wisconsin or Orlando Franklin, OT UMiami, or Stefen Wisniewski, G/C Penn State, or on Defense with either Akeem Ayers, LB UCLA, or Aaron Williams, CB Texas...

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

This offense stunts his growth as much as him just hitting the whole and getting the 2.2 yards per carry. Looks like Alabama backs need 20 touches per to notch good games. We don't have the carries for him to be a successful back, and we are all over the place with the backs we do have.

For me shipping 2 or even three backs wouldn't be out of the question if I could get one or two who I knew would be there healthy when I needed!!!!

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Ingram needs carries to succeed at this level. just like ray rice, trent richardson, the ugliest guy in sports(seattle rb), gore, spiller. and so on. teams with a 1 man show back there, u give the guy 25 plays hes going to get u 100+ yds a game. and he will get that possibly in 2013 or 14. hes running now like he did in alabama. he knows he has to stay noticed.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

I just do not see it being all on Ingram. Its our line..

If it is however Ingram, and he needs 25 carries per game to break 100 yards he may want to try another league. He is not going to be the all star workhorse getting 30% of the snaps averaging 3.7 YPC in this NFL.

Peterson has had 25 carries in only 2 games this season.
Marshawn Lynch 25+ only 4 games.
Doug martin 25+ only 2 games.
Chris Johnson 25+ only 1 game.

Consistently Arian Foster gets 25+ carries a game but there is a reason for that. He fkn earned that.

Foster and Lynch are the ONLY 2 RBs in the NFL that average over 20 carries per game.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

We tried that already, it didn't work, maybe you don't remember '10? That's a huge part of why Ingram is here. That's basically why the "3-headed monster" of Thomas/Bush/Bell in '09 has become the "four headed monster" of today.

Also, people tend to argue in circles about this stuff, I do like the discussion, it's fun. But I say, again and again, Mark Ingram is here for TOMORROW, not today. He is very likely going to be the guy who takes Pierre's place as workhorse back in 3-4 years. The same way Pierre was groomed to take the mantle over from Deuce. We're just not seeing it yet.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

I know this thread is about Ingram, but I think Sproles is going to have a big game tonight. He didn't play the first match.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

I see Ingram getting traded, and Ivory (if he stays healthy this season) becoming the work horse.

We will transition to a hard up the middle ground game, the o-line is not protecting for screens like it used to, Brees arm is not as strong as it used to be. We will still and always be a pass first offense, but the ground game will change.

For the dynamic parts of our run game Cadet will transition into the Sproles/PT option.

PT is healthy and hasn't touched the ball more than 10 times in a game since Denver. 3.7 YPC carry Ingramis being put to the test and he is not going to be around after this season.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

I just cannot believe there will be much of any trading of RBs going on in the offseason. SP moved up to draft Ingram, meaning he clearly likes him, and last season was even quoted as saying (and I'm paraphrasing here), that HE (SP) was the only reason that Ingram wasn't rookie of the year. Now SP has had to sit and watch as someone else plays with his new toy.

All of our RBs are very talented and like Oak said above, we are going to be transitioning our game as Brees continues to age. He's accurate as all heck but his 'zip' is beginning to fade ever so slightly. Just my opinion, but I find it hard to believe that we will be losing a RB with his potential and, more importantly, his price tag. Plus, what has he done that will attract potential suitors? We would get very little value for him in a trade, and certainly nothing close to the price we paid.

I suspect we will see more releases of veterans and FA signings to bolster the defense some more than to try to mess much with the offense, IMO

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

He has a 7.4mm 4 year deal (FA 2015), we are deep at RB, and we need cap space next year.

Ivory ia 1.2mm and restricted free agent next year.
PT is a 11mm 4 year deal.. FA 2015
Cadet is 1.55mm RFA 2015
Sproles is 14mm FA 2015.

Ingram has the lowest ROI. The least preforming for the $... Someone will take him just as they did Ricky Williams and Reggie Bush... Hell Miami might make it a triple crown.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Looking at actual 2012 investment...

Sproles - 4.25 million
Thomas - 2.26 million
Igram - 1.7 million
Ivory - 0.6 Million
Cadet - 0.4 million

I think its clear who has the worst ROI, and it isn't Ingram.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Hmmm. I may start hating wildly on Sproles, just to make these conversations more interesting. That little guy is TOTALLY OVER RATED. I mean he flipped Aldon Smith in a somersault flying through the air, he caught the yardage record-breaking pass from Brees, and led the league in all purpose yards last year, but other than that, WHAT HAS HE DONE FOR US LATELY? LOL

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

I guess I see it this way-

If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why?

Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract.

PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now

So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game).

Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs

But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Almost a perfect post, except Ivory is a RFA so we can tender him and possibly get some kind of draft pick for him.

I keep forgetting the new tender levels tho, we may not get jack squat for him.


This is all I found...

In that aspect yes. In reality,you are a team looking for a solid workhorse RB and Ingram is about as good as you are going to get.

Loomis is not going to open up a Buffett and let a team pick who they want.

He is going to put whom ever he wants on the market.

Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear
 

Just as an aside, I don't even think a lot of teams out there would be interested in Pierre Thomas, if he was offered up for trade....would they give anything for him.... I am of the conclusion that a lot of people out there in football STILL don't really know who he is, or how good he is. You can kinda tell from reading the coverage in other newspapers and websites of the teams we play, or the B-team announcers and what they say about him - the non-Gruden types don't really seem to know that much about him. He wasn't from a big school and wasn't a high draft pick, and even when he makes amazing plays happen, he doesn't really make "Sports Center" highlights type shows very often or get much attention. Unless you actually see him run , and catch, to know how good he is, his numbers are always kind of small and unimpressive on paper, to somebody just looking at them from far away. He's totally a sleeper, off the radar, and I honestly think the whole world STILL under estimates him sometimes, or doesn't really know who he is. Just my opinion.

Ingram is the only one with a "name" that other people might want, IMHO. Not that I think he is going anywhere, but we'll see.

That's why Sproles is not going anywhere.