westvirginia Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I'm still getting over the fact that Ingram supposedly ran against scrubs during his college career. Me too. Who has ever watched the SEC and can say that crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Yessir! Bush was never gonna be a workhorse back/have 20+ carries. That's what everyone who was everyone was saying as the kid entered the NFL. Duhh. The same could be said about McCluster"Ginsu" ..... don't pound your chest too hard. And CJ Spillar. Thanks for coming out of the woodwork when "we" all knew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Neither of those guys had anywhere near the hype and college career Bush had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawofmurphy Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's not that he ran against scrubs (although compared to the pros, every team IS made up mostly of scrubs), but that he padded his stats LAST YEAR against the scrubbier teams and faltered against the less scrubby teams. Let's use some honest-to-gosh stats, yeah? Four best games...rush defense rank in parentheses. Duke(113) - 9-151-16.8 Georgia(56) - 12-86-7.2 (Best game of the year? I guess?) Arkansas(71) - 24-157-6.5 Tennessee(60) - 14-88-6.3 Four worst games... Mississippi St.(15) - 18-53-2.9 Auburn(9) - 10-36-3.6 South Carolina(12) - 11-41-3.7 Florida (31) - 12-47-3.9 This all said, it obviously goes both ways. He'll have better offensive linemen blocking for him which helps. And maybe he got dinged up in there. I think, for example, that Ryan Williams' 2010 injury made him look way worse than he was. I HOPE Ingram turns into the next Emmitt Smith. It's just that RIGHT NOW...with no preseason look at him yet... I do worry that he'll never turn into a dynamic NFL RB. Sorry I'm still getting over the fact that Ingram supposedly ran against scrubs during his college career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's not that he ran against scrubs (although compared to the pros, every team IS made up mostly of scrubs), but that he padded his stats LAST YEAR against the scrubbier teams and faltered against the less scrubby teams. Let's use some honest-to-gosh stats, yeah? Four best games...rush defense rank in parentheses. Duke(113) - 9-151-16.8 Georgia(56) - 12-86-7.2 (Best game of the year? I guess?) Arkansas(71) - 24-157-6.5 Tennessee(60) - 14-88-6.3 Four worst games... Mississippi St.(15) - 18-53-2.9 Auburn(9) - 10-36-3.6 South Carolina(12) - 11-41-3.7 Florida (31) - 12-47-3.9 This all said, it obviously goes both ways. He'll have better offensive linemen blocking for him which helps. And maybe he got dinged up in there. I think, for example, that Ryan Williams' 2010 injury made him look way worse than he was. I HOPE Ingram turns into the next Emmitt Smith. It's just that RIGHT NOW...with no preseason look at him yet... I do worry that he'll never turn into a dynamic NFL RB. Sorry Way to just use ONE year's stats, when he was in a shared backfield. You are quite adept at skewing stats to fit your argument. Come back when you wanna play fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawofmurphy Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 You can see the games are ranked by ypc, a rate stat. *shrug* I hope he succeeds...we'll just have to wait and see Way to just use ONE year's stats, when he was in a shared backfield. You are quite adept at skewing stats to fit your argument. Come back when you wanna play fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) You can see the games are ranked by ypc, a rate stat. *shrug* I hope he succeeds...we'll just have to wait and see I understand the games were ranked by yards per carry. I made no mention of that. I said you used one year's stats; a year where he was coming off a major injury and thus shared the backfield with perhaps an equally talented back. So again, come back with your stats when you're ready to project them in a complete manner. I'm not going to do the work for you. Edited August 9, 2011 by darin3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) shared the backfield with perhaps an equally an even more ridiculously talented back. Fixed. I officially stake my claim to the Huddle Trent Richardson Nuthugger award. Teach me Taz. Edited August 9, 2011 by flemingd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Fixed. I officially stake my claim to the Huddle Trent Richardson Nuthugger award. Teach me Taz. Yeah, he is a beast. Problem was, Ingram was the Heisman winner and had earned it based on tenure. We'll see what Richardson does this year... it could be Heisman worthy. Psst, Mr. Murphy... Ingram rushed for 728 yards as a freshman with 12 scores and 1,658 with 17 TDs and a 6.1 ypc as a sophomore in his Heisman campaign. Come on, don't give us half the story. Had he not suffered a pretty significant knee injury, who knows if the talented Richardson would have had the workload he got when Ingram came back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 .......alot of bannter over a team that runs the ball very little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 .......alot of bannter over a team that runs the ball very little. Silly man... During the 2009 Superbowl season, the Saints had 544 passing attempts (378 completions) to 468 rushing attempts. That included 108 receptions by a RB. the Saints got away from that last year more due to injury at the RB position than anything else, hence the Ingram draft pick at a position that was seemingly already deep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) .......alot of bannter over a team that runs the ball very little. Well, considering they had a horrific running tandum (hence the removal of Bush and Ivory just didn't cut it and PT, paging PT), they still managed to run 37% of the time. Not great by any means, but I suspect with Ingrahm and the likes of Sproles, I could see this easily move to a more 55/45 split. Edit to add: rajncajn beat me to the punch! Edited August 9, 2011 by BearBroncos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rd and schlong Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The saints got away from running the ball because their running backs weren't built for it. Bush, Thomas, and Ivory were all less physical runners who excelled catching the ball. Ingram is a brute runner and I expect the Saints to be much more balanced this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 To put that into perspective, Pittsuburgh, considered a run-first team, had 506 passing attempts to 460 rushing attempts during their 2008 Superbowl campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 The saints got away from running the ball because their running backs weren't built for it. Bush, Thomas, and Ivory were all less physical runners who excelled catching the ball. Ingram is a brute runner and I expect the Saints to be much more balanced this year. Maybe Bush who is lucky if he's 205 at 6-0, but Thomas is a fireplug at 5-11 215 & Ivory is beast at 6-0 220+. Ivory was physical enough, he just kept getting hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) not entirely true. (by the way BB %37 ranks among the lowest) 2009 (superbowl year) was the only recent year they broke the top ten. go look @ their rushers stats, hardley stout. 2009 is the exception, i look for the Saints to continue to be pass happy. Edited August 9, 2011 by hooknladder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Fixed. I officially stake my claim to the Huddle Trent Richardson Nuthugger award. Teach me Taz. Nuthugging cannot be taught. It only is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 not entirely true. (by the way BB %37 ranks among the lowest) 2009 (superbowl year) was the only recent year they broke the top ten. go look @ their rushers stats, hardley stout. 2009 is the exception, i look for the Saints to continue to be pass happy. 2009 is not an exception, it's the goal. I can drum up a few articles if you like, but it should have been obvious to everyone as soon as they drafted Ingram. Why do you think Brees' interception rate blew up last year? They don't want to be pass-happy, they're looking for balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Majestic as the passing game is, this is still an offense that thrives on balance. In their ’09 Super Bowl season, the Saints ranked fourth in passing and sixth in rushing. Last season, the pass game ranked third but the run game dropped to 28th. A slew of injuries at the tailback position turned an uneasy Payton into a one-dimensional play-caller. Perhaps it was this experience that prompted the splurge on Mark Ingram. After all, the powers that be were not happy that it took Pierre Thomas 10 weeks to recover from a sprained ankle last season. Thomas, one of the smoother runners in the game when it comes to timing and accelerating off lead blocks, is healthy now, but his reputation is a bit dented. Not completely healthy is the bruising Chris Ivory, who is rebounding slowly from a Lisfranc (foot) operation he had more than six months ago. Here ya go, that didn't take long... Excelent article BTW outlining the Saints. This guy really knows his stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 2009 is not an exception, it's the goal. I can drum up a few articles if you like, but it should have been obvious to everyone as soon as they drafted Ingram. Why do you think Brees' interception rate blew up last year? They don't want to be pass-happy, they're looking for balance. i've been here long enough to know not to try to get in the last word in with you when it comes to the Saints. and I agree that it is the goal, (glad you said said that), and I also think Ingram will have value....I just think it's easier said than done (changing philosphy or trends)...although they have done it before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Silly man... During the 2009 Superbowl season, the Saints had 544 passing attempts (378 completions) to 468 rushing attempts. That included 108 receptions by a RB. the Saints got away from that last year more due to injury at the RB position than anything else, hence the Ingram draft pick at a position that was seemingly already deep. Good stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Good stuff. think ya missed the whole point Goop.....-it was ONE year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) i've been here long enough to know not to try to get in the last word in with you when it comes to the Saints. and I agree that it is the goal, (glad you said said that), and I also think Ingram will have value....I just think it's easier said than done (changing philosphy or trends)...although they have done it before. That's just the thing, it's not a philosophy. It was done out necessity and calling an effect caused by a player injury a trend is a bit off base. I would wager that every team throws more when their lead RB gets injured, let alone all 3 in a single season. BTW, if you go back to the 2006 season when we went to the NFC title game you'll see similar numbers to the one's I posted before. So at least 2 of the 5 years Payton has been here, when he's been able to achieve that balance, we've been one of the top teams in the league. Judging by the pick of Ingram & by what Payton & Loomis have been saying since picking him, they recognize that fact. So, to me, it stands to reason that the Saints RB's could play a major role in fantasy production this season given their past history and quite worthy of the "banter." And this isn't about getting the last word in... I disagreed with what you said and just stating what I see as the facts. If you still want to argue your point, It's certainly not going to hurt my feelings and I welcome the debate. It's not often I get to discuss a subject I'm really familiar with around here. Edited August 9, 2011 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Taz, most definitely I would take Ingram over Greene, even though Greene is #15 on my cheat sheets, 1 spot above Ingram. So your cheat sheets aren't cheat sheets, or just a list of players arranged almost in some kind of order If you watched his college career you should know about his talent level and it translates very well to the pro game. Barring injury you can take the MIGHT out of that statement. but there is Carolina twice. Wiggle+Power+Vision playing in a pro style offense against the big boys of the SEC absolutely translates. No intelligent football person would do that. The Saints did, and they won a Super Bowl. Intelligent enough. I'm still getting over the fact that Ingram supposedly ran against scrubs during his college career. Yep, The SEC is the same as the MAC. I don't know why anyone is trying to talk sense to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 That's just the thing, it's not a philosophy. It was done out necessity and calling an effect caused by a player injury a trend is a bit off base. I would wager that every team throws more when their lead RB gets injured, let alone all 3 in a single season. BTW, if you go back to the 2006 season when we went to the NFC title game you'll see similar numbers to the one's I posted before. So at least 2 of the 5 years Payton has been here, when he's been able to achieve that balance, we've been one of the top teams in the league. Judging by the pick of Ingram & by what Payton & Loomis have been saying since picking him, they recognize that fact. So, to me, it stands to reason that the Saints RB's could play a major role in fantasy production this season given their past history and quite worthy of the "banter." And this isn't about getting the last word in... I disagreed with what you said and just stating what I see as the facts. If you still want to argue your point, It's certainly not going to hurt my feelings and I welcome the debate. It's not often I get to discuss a subject I'm really familiar with around here. i think you're predicting a return to the 2009 numbers (right?) -(where no one back had any special fantasy value), which will be difficult to repeat....-and this time with one back (Ingram) combining all the rushing stats of the combined 2009 backs (or most). - i'm suggesting this is a bit of a reach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.