Danno

Where he was drafted is irrelevant. All he has to show anyone is that he's a good RB. There's no need to justify his cost, only to justify making the team.

Loomis is the one who should justify Ingram's cost.

Ingram was a very late 1st rounder. Its not Ingram's fault the Saints paid more than the 28th pick to acquire him.

jeanpierre

You're right that the culpability falls to Loomis for selecting Ingram in the first round; I've posted that before and couldn't agree any more than I have...

Now the decisions for starting and playing time, regarding one player over another, should be independent of how a player arrived to a roster - we've both lauded Coach Payton that he trends that way and what makes him respected by players.

But you're kidding yourself if you don't think that first round selections and their production and impact are not and should not be held to a higher standard than players selected in later rounds or undrafted rookie free agents...

And the coaching staff has as much blame in Ingram's stunted development and impact for failing to get him the touches and the rhythm necessary for him to be the impact back he was selected to be...

My argument is that those opportunities should be there for him this season and it's on him to make the most of them...

I would even argue that Charles Brown is a potential busted pick if he fails to secure the starting left tackle job based on his time on this team AND the pick that was invested to select him...

It's not that my way is the right way, I just make the right way my way...