NEW Mark Ingram thread (post Dallas)

[|Mitch|]

Originally Posted by pherein

yeah, I know, but if hes not durable thats a problem also. I dont see AP crying about his #26th ranked OL. AP produces just fine with no excusses, like PT.

PT = 3.8 ypc

MI 5.6 ypc

PT = 13 long

MI = 34 long

Yeah I see how PT produces with a not so great O-Line...

[pherein]

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

PT = 3.8 ypc

MI 5.6 ypc

PT = 13 long

MI = 34 long

Yeah I see how PT produces with a not so great O-Line...

today, silly. post over the season, or do you want me to post their stats ? be happy to.

[|Mitch|]

Originally Posted by pherein

today, silly. post over the season

What part of MI was battling injuries did you not understand? and it seems with a great O-Line, MI outshined PT tonight... just sayin'

[pherein]

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

What part of MI was battling injuries did you not understand? and it seems with a great O-Line, MI outshined PT tonight... just sayin'

IF hes not durable then he will never be great. Good RB's dont need a great OL. Anyone can run for 20 yards threw a giant hole mitch without being touched. Good RB's beat the 1st guy always or more, or they are not a RB. I was taught that when I ran. Anyone can run for 20-40 yards and get tackled by the 1st guy. Thats OL, not a RB. Good RB's almost always beat the 1st guy.

[|Mitch|]

Originally Posted by pherein

Anyone can run for 20 yards threw a giant hole mitch without being touched.

Apparently PT couldn't tonight, he had the same opportunities

[pherein]

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

Apparently PT couldn't tonight, he had the same opportunities

PT broke many tackles, and beat the 1st guy. You dont always win. You seriously saying that MI ran better than PT tonight ? or that MI is a better RB than PT?
Thats nuts

[|Mitch|]

Originally Posted by pherein

PT broke many tackles, and beat the 1st guy. You dont always win.

Seriously? Makes absolutely no sense... MI has a great game because PT beat the first guy?

MI ran 14 for 145 10.4 avg and PT 17 for 87 5.1 avg behind the same line against the same defense

And yes I believe that MI can be a better RB than PT with adequate carries and a decent blocking O-Line, proved tonight!

[saintfan]

Originally Posted by pherein

Good RB's dont need a great OL.

Well I disagree. Great RBs might not need a great OL, but good RBs can certainly become great running behind a great OL (See Emmit Smith). Mark has struggled and some of that is on him, but when he has just a little room, well, we all saw it.

I'm not saying his worries are over. That remains to be seen, but none of our backs have been good THIS year, and that's on the OL in my humble opinion.

[pherein]

Originally Posted by saintfan

Well I disagree. Great RBs might not need a great OL, but good RBs can certainly become great running behind a great OL (See Emmit Smith). Mark has struggled and some of that is on him, but when he has just a little room, well, we all saw it.

I'm not saying his worries are over. That remains to be seen, but none of our backs have been good THIS year, and that's on the OL in my humble opinion.

yep, but I dont consider smith to be a great RB because he had the best OL for years in dallas. B.Sanders, W.payton, MA, AP, and etc did not have great OL, but still produced. Even Duece was great because our OL was not that good at the time. Comparing MI to someone like Deuce is pretty insane, and Deuce was a very good RB. Deuce didnt need OL to break out 10-40% of the time during the game, and teams really feared him.
Teams fear PT, but not MI, because hes done nothing. 1 game is not going to change that.