At least two teams don't have Ingram on their board

[patsinthesnow]

Sorry guys. I didn't know a rookie who hasn't played a down is vastly superior to a 1,000 yard, 13 TD, no fumble NFL rusher.

Similarities:

*Almost same size (5'9 215 and 5'10 220)
*rarely/never fumble
*lack top end speed
*good initial burst/finding the hole
*tough runner

Ingram has better juke moves and catches better but I think BJGE is a better trucker.

 

[NEPats1]

FWIW, Florio says he thinks it's the Pats spreading these rumors about Ingram so that he'll slide to them:

As to Ingram, we suspect that Patriots coach Bill Belichick and/or one of his lieutenants are spreading rumors about Ingram’s knee, because Belichick knows that Ingram could give the Patriots’ offense something that it has been lacking since the days of Corey Dillon — a legitimate, high-end threat on the ground.

Ian Rapoport of the Boston Herald addresses that possibility, with quotes from unnamed scouts who see Ingram helping the Patriots develop a complete, and deadly, offensive attack with Ingram in the backfield.


Mark Ingram could be just what the Pats need | ProFootballTalk

 

[MaineMan]

Could prove to be unfounded? They are unfounded. I mean, I get it...here's a guy who's not the best athlete among running backs, is relatively slow, but just produces on the field. People say, "That guy can't succeed in the NFL", others answer "The NFL's all-time leading rusher had those same criticisms, and he did OK!" I think I played devil's advocate myself on that argument during the season. However,

Comparing anybody in the draft to Emmitt Smith (or Jerry Rice, or **** Butkis, or Jim Brown, or Tom Brady) is ridiculous. You might as well compare me to Rice because we're the same height and weight and ran the same 40. Believe it or not, nobody drew that comparisons. It's just sportswriter laziness, and it's an epidemic. I mean, would it kill someone to compare Ingram to Deuce McAlister or someone and lower the bar?

I know just what you mean. I'm the same height and weight as Darius Butler, but my 40, vertical and 3-cone are more like Lee Ziemba's.

Probably, worse, actually.

OTOH, I seem to recall several years ago a young Philly sportswriter comparing a high-level prospect to a mid-level pro and later being found floating face down in the Schuylkill. Tough crowd over there in Philly.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'm intrigued at the thought of a player as potentially explosive (in the good way) as Ingram - but whoever Belichick picks of course I'm fine with that.

The important thing is that we seem to be getting feedback that finding a featured RB is a priority - as one would expect a deep threat WR is also a priority. For WR I'm thinking a guy who has great speed and can be explosive off the line with a short pass or beat his guy deep for a long one - no need for routes beyond that - we've got plenty of slot/route guys already.

Maybe someone in the 3rd like Edmond Gates at WR. Add that to an explosive RB and you've got some defenses that are going to get burned if they play the Patriots too agressively.

I've got no idea what Bill's thinking is but I can see him having a draft that's going to give Brady all the weapons he could want.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Ingram is definitely a run down the middle bruising type of RB

There is nothing about Ingram that will remind us of Maroney if we do draft him...I assure you

 

[mgteich]

Even if Green-Ellis were a pro-bowl quality ruinning back, we'd still need a backup and someone to split reps with him. After all, Green-Ellis could get injured or need a break.

Seriously, we have Green-Ellis and no backup. At 3rd down back, we have Woodhead and no backup.

This is simply not acceptable.

Sure, folks have found solid backs late. We found Brady at #199. So what! We should draft the running back who has the greatest chance of helping the team. There is no question in my mind that there are top backs who would be major upgrades over CLAYTON. After all, it is Clayton who thios player would compete with. There are top backs who are major upgrades over Morris if anyone thinks he will come back.

In any case, I think that both Ingram and LeShoure would be major additions.

 

[Triumph]

If the Pats draft Ingram and he is the player that I think he is, a case could be made to keep K Faulk.

 

[mgteich]

I don't see the relationship.

If the Pats draft Ingram and he is the player that I think he is, a case could be made to keep K Faulk.

 

[supafly]

If the Pats draft Ingram and he is the player that I think he is, a case could be made to keep K Faulk.

I think you can make a case to keep Faulk one way or another.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Kettani.

..

 

[Triumph]

I don't see the relationship.

Even if Green-Ellis were a pro-bowl quality ruinning back, we'd still need a backup and someone to split reps with him. After all, Green-Ellis could get injured or need a break.

Seriously, we have Green-Ellis and no backup. At 3rd down back, we have Woodhead and no backup.

This is simply not acceptable.

The Pats usual MO is to bring in a couple of low cost Vet RBs. Taylor and Morris backed up Maroney and later BJGE. I think Inram can be more productive than 2 new Vets whoever they might be and actually push BJGE for playing time.

That would the Pats the luxury of keeping Faulk to backup Woody.

 

[mgteich]

OK.

So, if we get a top running back (Ingram or LeShoure), we have our backup for Green-Ellis, or our partner for Green-Ellis. Then, we don't NEED to find a running back in free agency.

For me, we always need a 3rd down back, and a backup 3rd down back (who has another role). Foe me, Faulk fits that bill whether or not we bring in vet running backs.

We have also carried a fifth back. As of now, that would be Clayton.
========================
SUMMARY
Green-Ellis, Ingram or LeShoure
Woodhead, Faulk
Clayton
========================
We still would likely bring in vets, or a late round draftee, to compete with Faulk (if he even is signed) or Clayton.





In the end, we still could bring in vets to compete with Faulk and

The Pats usual MO is to bring in a couple of low cost Vet RBs. Taylor and Morris backed up Maroney and later BJGE. I think Inram can be more productive than 2 new Vets whoever they might be and actually push BJGE for playing time.

That would the Pats the luxury of keeping Faulk to backup Woody.

 

[borg]

BJGE
Woodhead
Faulk
Delone Carter....mark my words here
Seasoned Vet....preferably injury prone with a high salary

 

[Triumph]

OK.

So, if we get a top running back (Ingram or LeShoure), we have our backup for Green-Ellis, or our partner for Green-Ellis. Then, we don't NEED to find a running back in free agency.

IMO, no.

If Ingram is what some folks say that he is. If he is, then the NE would be set up for years to come.

For me, we always need a 3rd down back, and a backup 3rd down back (who has another role). Foe me, Faulk fits that bill whether or not we bring in vet running backs.

Sure, but if the Pats bring in 2 more Vets like they had in 2010 would there still be room for K Faulk?

We have also carried a fifth back. As of now, that would be Clayton.

I know. I never have high hopes anymore after all the scrap heap RBs the Pats have brought in through over the years.

BJGE has been the exception to the rule.
========================
SUMMARY
Green-Ellis, Ingram or LeShoure
Woodhead, Faulk
Clayton
========================
We still would likely bring in vets, or a late round draftee, to compete with Faulk (if he even is signed) or Clayton.





In the end, we still could bring in vets to compete with Faulk and[/QUOTE]

 

[mgteich]

The cost for the vets is only their signing bonuses. So, yes, I see us bringing in camp competition, and yes, I see Faulk still having a good chance to make the roster.
=============================
OUR BASE
Green-Ellis, Ingram (or LeShore). Woodhead

COMPETING FOR TWO MORE ROSTER SPOTS
2 vets, Faulk, Clayton, 5th or 6th rounder
=============================

.

Sure, but if the Pats bring in 2 more Vets like they had in 2010 would there still be room for K Faulk?



.

 

[RayClay]

I'm not big on numbers, but a 4.62 for a relatively small RB in the first round?

I guess every slow receiver will be Jerry Rice too.

 

[Triumph]

I'm not big on numbers, but a 4.62 for a relatively small RB in the first round?

I guess every slow receiver will be Jerry Rice too.

Leshoure ran 4.59 and Ryan Williams 4.61

 

[bucky]

I'm not big on numbers, but a 4.62 for a relatively small RB in the first round?

Mark Ingram is the prototypical size for a RB. And while his 40 time could be faster, it's still fast enough to make him a "clean" prospect.

 

[RayClay]

Leshoure ran 4.59 and Ryan Williams 4.61

Leshoure is 232.

 

[RayClay]

Mark Ingram is the prototypical size for a RB. And while his 40 time could be faster, it's still fast enough to make him a "clean" prospect.

He's not a huge back, he's average size. He doesn't have the speed you'd usually expect for an average size 1st rounder.

He has some good moves and plays hard, but move that up another level, does he break free? He's certainly not bowling over NFL players, plus he gets caught from behind when he should break some.

A nice running back, but his physical ability is not outstanding IMO.

Run that fast carrying 230-235 pounds, it's a different story.