Mark Ingram's role becoming clear

burningmetal · 11-25-2012, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

I dislike unfair criticism. The Harper criticism is ridiculous. The Ingram hate is over the top.

I responded about Ivory in kind. I like Ivory, I like him a lot. But I'm not dumb enough to think he didn't have any weaknesses coming into this season. Our coach even said so.

Anyone with any football knowledge knows as the O-line goes, so do the RBs. Did you notice how much better the O-line started playing when Kromer went back to his O-line coaching position?

The Ingram haters refuse to see that. Just because Ivory is our best pure runner doesn't mean Ingram sucks. I just have to keep remembering there are a lot of young uninformed posters around here that just want to vent. So its all good I guess.

Was PT hurt? He had 1 carry for 0 yards. Why didn't he see the ball more?

No friend, that is not unfair criticism. Remember last year when we ran the ball so well? Ingram was putrid. And our backs weren't playing awful early in the year, we were just constantly way behind. Like today. Now I said myself in another post that the line woke up, and that helped. But Thomas was playing ok when he WAS getting the ball, whereas Ingram wasn't. I agree that Ingram has been playing better, but all this stuff about eating crow that I keep hearing some people say, is BS. He was awful until very recently, and still isn't lighting it up. And who said Ivory had no weakness? They all have weaknesses. But Ivory, Thomas and Sproles have simply outplayed Ingram the majority of the time. I'll start giving Ingram credit when he shows more consistency.

As for Harper, his play is indefensible. He is almost always getting burned. Safeties are called safeties for a reason. they are supposed to keep everything in front of them. But both our safeties always seem to be behind.

As for PT today? Beats me. I have no idea what happened to him.

Danno · 11-25-2012, 10:08 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Now I said myself in another post that the line woke up, and that helped. But Thomas was playing ok when he WAS getting the ball, whereas Ingram wasn't.

No PT wasn't.

burningmetal · 11-26-2012, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by Danno

No PT wasn't.

Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything. Go back and watch some of these games. Or just decide in advance that you won't agree with anything I have to say, which seems to be the case. I could care less at this point. I'm not biased to any particular player, or players. I'm going by what I see. I don't care how old you are, or how much longer you think you've been watching football, I know what I see when I see it.

It has become futile to try to make a point around here, without some agenda getting in the way of facts. So before I blow up needlessly, let me just agree to disagree.

Danno · 11-26-2012, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything.

KC - 1.8 yards per carry
GB - 1.6 yards per carry
SD - 3.3 yards per carry
TB - 2.5 yards per carry
ATL- 2.0 yards per carry
SF - 0.0 yards per carry

Those don't look like he was tearing it up.

burningmetal · 11-26-2012, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

KC - 1.8 yards per carry
GB - 1.6 yards per carry
SD - 3.3 yards per carry
TB - 2.5 yards per carry
ATL- 2.0 yards per carry
SF - 0.0 yards per carry

Those don't look like he was tearing it up.

I didn't say he was tearing it up. He was getting the only guy picking up the tough yards when we had to have a first down. And he was the only guy to have a 100 yard game, which was against carolina. Where was your man Mark Ingram at? The line was playing horrible, but who was the one guy doing anything? It was Thomas. If Ingram got the ball needing a yard, he got -1.

TheOak · 11-26-2012, 08:23 AM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything. Go back and watch some of these games. Or just decide in advance that you won't agree with anything I have to say, which seems to be the case. I could care less at this point. I'm not biased to any particular player, or players. I'm going by what I see. I don't care how old you are, or how much longer you think you've been watching football, I know what I see when I see it.

It has become futile to try to make a point around here, without some agenda getting in the way of facts. So before I blow up needlessly, let me just agree to disagree.

You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run...

His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen?

Danno · 11-26-2012, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by TheOak

You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run...

His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen?

Great point. Lost in all the Ivory/Ingram discussions is the fact that our best running back isn't getting many carries. Why?

As running backs go, neither Ivory nr Ingram hold a candle to PT's talents and skills.

burningmetal · 11-26-2012, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run...

His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen?

Only one long run? And this matters why? Chris Ivory and Darren Sproles are the home run hitters. Of course Ivory has some power too, but Pierre is a grinder, and yes, a specialist in the screen game. Pierre is the one guy who seems to more often than not get what you need out of him. Couldn't say that about the other guys when things were bad.

I keep hearing Ingram apologists gripe about his amount of touches, but here's what they fail to realize. He leads the team in carries! He has 17 more carries than the second place guy, PT, yet Pierre has two more yards for the season. PT is averaging 4.5 a carry, and Ingram is averaging 3.7 YPC. Who does it sound like needs more carries?

And don't BS me. They've both benefited from better blocking of late, and yet Pierre still averages almost a full yard per carry more than Mark. Now again, I appreciate the improvements he at least seems to be making, but I'm going on the first year and a half of what he did. This thread started as a discussion about how people expect us to apologize to Ingram after just a couple of good games. If you're not trying to get me to kiss his butt, and you just simply ask what I think of his play in the last few weeks, I say it's been a lot better. But as far as saying that he has legitimized his being selected in the first round, I have to see more. Yesterday, nobody ran the ball very well.

Danno · 11-26-2012, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

This thread started as a discussion about how people expect us to apologize to Ingram after just a couple of good games.

No it didn't.

burningmetal · 11-27-2012, 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by Danno

No it didn't.

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.

11-25-2012, 09:05 PM	#1
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by Danno I dislike unfair criticism. The Harper criticism is ridiculous. The Ingram hate is over the top. I responded about Ivory in kind. I like Ivory, I like him a lot. But I'm not dumb enough to think he didn't have any weaknesses coming into this season. Our coach even said so. Anyone with any football knowledge knows as the O-line goes, so do the RBs. Did you notice how much better the O-line started playing when Kromer went back to his O-line coaching position? The Ingram haters refuse to see that. Just because Ivory is our best pure runner doesn't mean Ingram sucks. I just have to keep remembering there are a lot of young uninformed posters around here that just want to vent. So its all good I guess. Was PT hurt? He had 1 carry for 0 yards. Why didn't he see the ball more? No friend, that is not unfair criticism. Remember last year when we ran the ball so well? Ingram was putrid. And our backs weren't playing awful early in the year, we were just constantly way behind. Like today. Now I said myself in another post that the line woke up, and that helped. But Thomas was playing ok when he WAS getting the ball, whereas Ingram wasn't. I agree that Ingram has been playing better, but all this stuff about eating crow that I keep hearing some people say, is BS. He was awful until very recently, and still isn't lighting it up. And who said Ivory had no weakness? They all have weaknesses. But Ivory, Thomas and Sproles have simply outplayed Ingram the majority of the time. I'll start giving Ingram credit when he shows more consistency. As for Harper, his play is indefensible. He is almost always getting burned. Safeties are called safeties for a reason. they are supposed to keep everything in front of them. But both our safeties always seem to be behind. As for PT today? Beats me. I have no idea what happened to him.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

11-25-2012, 10:08 PM	#2
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by burningmetal Now I said myself in another post that the line woke up, and that helped. But Thomas was playing ok when he WAS getting the ball, whereas Ingram wasn't. No PT wasn't.

11-26-2012, 01:15 AM	#3
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by Danno No PT wasn't. Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything. Go back and watch some of these games. Or just decide in advance that you won't agree with anything I have to say, which seems to be the case. I could care less at this point. I'm not biased to any particular player, or players. I'm going by what I see. I don't care how old you are, or how much longer you think you've been watching football, I know what I see when I see it. It has become futile to try to make a point around here, without some agenda getting in the way of facts. So before I blow up needlessly, let me just agree to disagree.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

11-26-2012, 08:13 AM	#4
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by burningmetal Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything. KC - 1.8 yards per carry GB - 1.6 yards per carry SD - 3.3 yards per carry TB - 2.5 yards per carry ATL- 2.0 yards per carry SF - 0.0 yards per carry Those don't look like he was tearing it up.

11-26-2012, 04:43 PM	#5
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by Danno KC - 1.8 yards per carry GB - 1.6 yards per carry SD - 3.3 yards per carry TB - 2.5 yards per carry ATL- 2.0 yards per carry SF - 0.0 yards per carry Those don't look like he was tearing it up. I didn't say he was tearing it up. He was getting the only guy picking up the tough yards when we had to have a first down. And he was the only guy to have a 100 yard game, which was against carolina. Where was your man Mark Ingram at? The line was playing horrible, but who was the one guy doing anything? It was Thomas. If Ingram got the ball needing a yard, he got -1.

11-26-2012, 08:23 AM	#6
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,055	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by burningmetal Yes, he most certainly was. He was grinding out every possible yard, where no one else was getting anything. Go back and watch some of these games. Or just decide in advance that you won't agree with anything I have to say, which seems to be the case. I could care less at this point. I'm not biased to any particular player, or players. I'm going by what I see. I don't care how old you are, or how much longer you think you've been watching football, I know what I see when I see it. It has become futile to try to make a point around here, without some agenda getting in the way of facts. So before I blow up needlessly, let me just agree to disagree. You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run... His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen?

11-26-2012, 08:38 AM	#7
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by TheOak You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run... His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen? Great point. Lost in all the Ivory/Ingram discussions is the fact that our best running back isn't getting many carries. Why? As running backs go, neither Ivory nr Ingram hold a candle to PT's talents and skills. Jamessr likes this.

11-26-2012, 04:59 PM	#8
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by TheOak You are letting your passion distort the facts. Numbers are facts and PT had 1 good game where be broke a long run... His specialty has been abandoned... When is the last time we ran a screen? Only one long run? And this matters why? Chris Ivory and Darren Sproles are the home run hitters. Of course Ivory has some power too, but Pierre is a grinder, and yes, a specialist in the screen game. Pierre is the one guy who seems to more often than not get what you need out of him. Couldn't say that about the other guys when things were bad. I keep hearing Ingram apologists gripe about his amount of touches, but here's what they fail to realize. He leads the team in carries! He has 17 more carries than the second place guy, PT, yet Pierre has two more yards for the season. PT is averaging 4.5 a carry, and Ingram is averaging 3.7 YPC. Who does it sound like needs more carries? And don't BS me. They've both benefited from better blocking of late, and yet Pierre still averages almost a full yard per carry more than Mark. Now again, I appreciate the improvements he at least seems to be making, but I'm going on the first year and a half of what he did. This thread started as a discussion about how people expect us to apologize to Ingram after just a couple of good games. If you're not trying to get me to kiss his butt, and you just simply ask what I think of his play in the last few weeks, I say it's been a lot better. But as far as saying that he has legitimized his being selected in the first round, I have to see more. Yesterday, nobody ran the ball very well.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

11-26-2012, 05:39 PM	#9
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by burningmetal This thread started as a discussion about how people expect us to apologize to Ingram after just a couple of good games. No it didn't.

11-27-2012, 03:20 AM	#10
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by Danno No it didn't. 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.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/53148-mark-ingrams-role-becoming-clear.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Latest Chris Ivory News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 08:37 PM	2
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 07:59 PM	7
The Latest Darren Sproles News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 06:55 PM	1
Mark Ingram's role becoming clear	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 06:35 PM	2