Did you want Mark Ingram in the draft?

[tombonneau]

Cobb...Yes, I wanted him badly and watched him tear it up time and time again every Sat. at Kentucky.

The problem was that most perceived him as 'another' slot WR here, and with Welker/Edelman many thought we'd never take him. Personally, I thought his versatility as a WR/RB/ST ace was great.

I still am not sure that he would've lined up on the outside here, but I really don't know the answer to that question. I didn't get a chance to watch too much of the game last night, did he line up in the slot or on the outside?

Think he was inside in 4wr sets but wasn't paying too close attention. End of the day, a gamer is a gamer though and you make room for those guys. Pack were even more flush with WRs and saw value in him. So far so good.

Kudos to mods for changing thread title. That will hopefully cause a bit less attacking of the OP.

 

[patchick]

Re: OT- (The inevitable Mark Ingram thread)

Although I will admit at the time I was kind of hoping for Cam Heyward to be picked at that spot

Same here, though the revamping of the defense makes they way they skipped over 5-tech prospects a little more palatable.

 

[ProudestRyno]

Sorry. I just think it is a little useless to talk draft picks at this point especially since they are all working on a little over a month's experience in the NFL. There was no offseason for these guys to acclimated to their team and the NFL. Most rookies will struggle this season because of it.

Then don't enter the thread. Why waste your time by posting a rude response and waste others time who read your response? No need to be an a-hole if you don't agree with a thread idea...

************ it's friday, chill out.

 

[TheSolderKing]

Re: OT- (The inevitable Mark Ingram thread)

Same here, though the revamping of the defense makes they way they skipped over 5-tech prospects a little more palatable.

thank you for changing my original title Patchick. This thread would have been created sooner or later. It was his first game and thank you all for who ever is not bothered by a very simple and honest question. i see some people add wise-ass input/remarks even with in the simplest threads and its questions.
Ingram's 1st game- was the perfect time for this thread. I think the saints are going to be scary w/ Sproles and Ingram b/c it really adds a new dimension to that team since those RB's can catch well and run routes well. I think Ingram will be a GOOD player, but I do NOT think I would ever waste a 1

I appreciate the people that take this thread for what it is and answer honestly to my question and not give me a hard time

I admit I have made a couple poor threads in the past... this is not one of them and plz answer honestly if not you do not belong in here. Thank you

 

[brady199]

Re: OT- (The inevitable Mark Ingram thread)

thank you for changing my original title Patchick. This thread would have been created sooner or later. It was his first game and thank you all for who ever is not bothered by a very simple and honest question. i see some people add wise-ass input/remarks even with in the simplest threads and its questions.
Ingram's 1st game- was the perfect time for this thread. I think the saints are going to be scary w/ Sproles and Ingram b/c it really adds a new dimension to that team since those RB's can catch well and run routes well. I think Ingram will be a GOOD player, but I do NOT think I would ever waste a 1

I appreciate the people that take this thread for what it is and answer honestly to my question and not give me a hard time

I admit I have made a couple poor threads in the past... this is not one of them and plz answer honestly if not you do not belong in here. Thank you

I don't know what it is about "TheSolderKing", but people sure do love to stir it up with You. Every Good Message Board needs some Major Drama Queens.

Thank God Football is BACK!:singing:

 

[Betterthanmost]

Did not want him because at the time, it did not look like is any different from durable BJGE. Time will tell, but we did alright in the draft.

 

[brady199]

I wouldn't of been upset if the Pats took ingram with the 28th pick, but watching the Saints last night, (who's offense is similar to the pats in terms of pass/run ratio) made me think about how Ingram was never going to get into a good rhythm in that offense, esp sharing carries with Thomas. I still think he is an intriguing player who I find easy to routue for.

So to answer your question, I would of been fine either way. I do like our end result with getting Vereen and a 1st.

One interesting thing about this thread is how 1/2 the people say you can't judge Ingram after one game (which is true) but many people feel safe in saying that Ridley will be a solid player after just a few preseason games. HMMMMM?

 

[TheSolderKing]

Re: OT- (The inevitable Mark Ingram thread)

I don't know what it is about "TheSolderKing", but people sure do love to stir it up with You. Every Good Message Board needs some Major Drama Queens.

Thank God Football is BACK!:singing:

we have a lot of those here EGO's board bullies that think they run the place

If you don't have a small bunch of haters in the various areas than you ain't do it right. You know what the it is? LIFE

 

[Ivan]

Well, he only rushed 40 yards on 13 carries last night so that is a definitive answer that he is clearly a bust. Let's move on.

Absolutely, who the hell does SolderKing think he is asking football related questions on a football messageboard?

Anyone know where the uggs thread is?

 

[Ivan]

I didn't want Ingram in the first but would have been OK with the choice had he dropped down around 40. I thought the decision to go with a franchise quality prospect at LT was the right one, adding a player who can protect Brady's back for the rest of his career was a priority. I'm fine with the Vereen and Ridley picks and think they will turn out well for them.

 

[Reckedtrek]

I didn't want Ingram in the first but would have been OK with the choice had he dropped down around 40. I thought the decision to go with a franchise quality prospect at LT was the right one, adding a player who can protect Brady's back for the rest of his career was a priority. I'm fine with the Vereen and Ridley picks and think they will turn out well for them.

I agree with this. I would not have been upset if they took Ingram in the first, but I'm happy with what they did. Teams are built from the lines out and BB focused on the Oline. I don't think you can go wrong there.

I was a little annoyed that they didn't go after an OLB in the second. I also thought the Pats would be a primarily 3-4 during the draft, too. I guess we'll see what happens soon enough!

 

[jays52]

When Houston took Watt, I just sat back and waited to see. I wasnt too crazy about nearly all the other 1st round picks, Ingram included. I thought that he was a good, decisive runner who had maximized his potential already and had a lot of mileage. I would have taken Ingram, albeit in the 3rd round. I didn't feel that he represented first round athleticism, and in turn value. A higher rated player and a first round pick was a fleecing of the Saints in my mind.

 

[brady199]

When Houston took Watt, I just sat back and waited to see. I wasnt too crazy about nearly all the other 1st round picks, Ingram included. I thought that he was a good, decisive runner who had maximized his potential already and had a lot of mileage. I would have taken Ingram, albeit in the 3rd round. I didn't feel that he represented first round athleticism, and in turn value. A higher rated player and a first round pick was a fleecing of the Saints in my mind.

According to Al Michaels the Saints thought Ingram was a top 10 Pick.

 

[Husse]

I didn't really want the Pats to draft him, especially with any of our first 3 picks. If they had drafted him with our fourth I would have been fine with it. But there was no chance of him falling that far, so that wasn't realistic.

Time will tell if he can succeed I suppose.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I don't think you need a large sample of games to conclude this guy is not the next Barry Sanders. He might be just starting in the Saints system, but it was obvious watching him last night that neither his size, speed, or "running instincts" were anything special.

I highly doubt the Patriots would have drafted him at that position anyway. 27 other teams passed on him.

 

[patsfan-1982]

i did not want him because i wanted the pats to Draft Dline and pass rushers but i do think the kid is going to have a good season and a good career

 

[Bostonian1962]

I'll tell you in about 5 years whether I wanted him or not.

 

[brady199]

I don't think you need a large sample of games to conclude this guy is not the next Barry Sanders. He might be just starting in the Saints system, but it was obvious watching him last night that neither his size, speed, or "running instincts" were anything special.

I highly doubt the Patriots would have drafted him at that position anyway. 27 other teams passed on him.

27 other teams passing on him has nothing to do with The Pats or anyone esle would of drafted him at 28. Every year someone gets drafted at 28, that got passed up 27 times. Is it me or am I the only one missing the logic here?

And who ever compared him to Barry Sanders? Speaking of Barry Sanders, he's had a lot of games with more carries then 13 and less yards then 40.

 

[Sciz]

If you would've forced me to pick an RB at 28, I would've taken Vereen over Ingram. I was very very high on Vereen and not a fan of Ingram at all.

 

[rookBoston]

I did want Ingram, and still have some envy. But I had both Leshoure and Vereen on my board, too, so I'm good with how things worked out. And in any case I love the Solder pick, so no sour grapes. It is worth mentioning that of Leshoure, Vereen and Ingram, Ingram is the only one that's been healthy and productive so far.