Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


Mark Ingram at #10?

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-28-2011, 12:27 PM   #16
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,507
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eknox View Post
If we don't get a capable tackle, our defense will be swiss cheese again. I say do like Jacksonville did last year, get the guy that will help your team the most and get the most out of the 1st pick. Just curious, do you like the Ingram pick better? If were going to reach at 10 take the tackle.
I agree about the NT need. The thing is, if we played our cards right we might be able to get a player at #10 AND still get Taylor or Paea.

As to the question of the thread, I would love to have Ingram. But at #10 I'd rather feed the front.
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-28-2011, 01:48 PM   #17
The Starter
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,099
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
While Mike Shanahan has a reputation for finding unheralded running backs, I have a hunch that he’ll have a hard time passing on Alabama’s Mark Ingram with the No. 10 pick if Ingram is available.
Wait, what?

Mike Shanahan has success with mid to late round RBs therefore he'll draft a RB at 10 even though Kyle ,the OC, is a pass first coordinator with a 60/40 pass run ration and a WR will likely be available at 10?
__________________
No longer were NFL coaches dealing inflexibly with spread [QBs] in ways that caused stunted development for players like [A. Smith and Vick] now, the idea is to bring what the quarterback can do, and what he should do, together as an organic whole
30gut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 04:12 PM   #18
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,505
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

If anything they've been looking at both 2nd round and 4th round prospects at Running Back. Looking at Ingram seems like nothing more then due diligence if that. I mean he would be nice to have but I wouldn't think we'd be ready for a championship run before we wear him down. Funny thing is if this was the 70's or early 80's Ingram would be a lock to be the number one pick.
__________________
6.67×10−11 m3 kg−1 s−2

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 04:19 PM   #19
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinzWin View Post
THat would be the worst move ever for us. Paea or Taylor at 10 would be just as bad. There is no chance any of those three go at #10. Mods are free to go ahead and lock this thread, lol.... all done here.
Considering that the owner/admin started the thread...
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 04:29 PM   #20
Impact Rookie
 
Redskin Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA- via VA
Age: 36
Posts: 635
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
Thoughts on this possibility?

The guy is a stud and we definitely need another RB, but at #10 I think we have other more pressing needs.
I would rather try to snag Kendall from OKst in the 2nd or 3rd. I dont think picking a RB at #10 will make the most impact on the field for us. I don't think a QB at 10 will be there that is worth the pick either (I see busts people, EVERYWHERE)... I would hope for a dynamic pass rusher or corner, maybe a WR if Jones or Green was available.
__________________
Hail to The REDSKINS
Redskin Jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 04:35 PM   #21
Special Teams
 
BuckSkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern Ohio
Age: 45
Posts: 232
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 44ever View Post
Because there are soooo many other things to discuss this off season right now right?

I actually would not object to the idea of taking a stud RB at 10. The way I see it is, if we can score more, then we need less of a dominate defense.

Plus it would add more action to our losses.
Watch it 44ever, you're starting to sound like a Big10 man. Heh, heh-- I knew you would come around. The ole 3 yards and a cloud of dust play.
__________________
"Any Nation willing to give up a little freedom, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
BuckSkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 04:47 PM   #22
Playmaker
 
freddyg12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,540
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Ingram is a great player, I thought of E. Smith too as somebody mentioned earlier. That said, he's a good prospect but not a once in a decade rb. For us to take a rb at 10 he'd have to be special. I see Ingram as a good, potentially great nfl player, but not a great enough prospect for this team to take at 10 given the defensive talent in the draft.
freddyg12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 05:55 PM   #23
Living Legend
 
skinsfaninok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oklahoma City (Originally from Biloxi, Ms)
Age: 27
Posts: 16,104
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

NO chance for Ingram at 10, that would be the worst case scenario for us.. ATV and K.W can carry the load for another season
__________________
THUNDER UP

"if you're good at something, never do it for free"- The Joker

skinsfaninok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 06:23 PM   #24
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,912
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

We have 4 bigger needs on offense than RB at QB, WR, RG and C. I'm content with Torrain/Williams unless we pick up a speed back in the 5th or so. I'd love for a Miami or NE to trade up with us for the #10 to grab Ingram but would be pretty annoyed if we made a move for him there.
__________________
Challenge Greatness! Be A Leader! Make A Difference!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 06:25 PM   #25
Living Legend
 
skinsfaninok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oklahoma City (Originally from Biloxi, Ms)
Age: 27
Posts: 16,104
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Shanny never takes a RB in the first
__________________
THUNDER UP

"if you're good at something, never do it for free"- The Joker

skinsfaninok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 07:31 PM   #26
Playmaker
 
SkinzWin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 2,693
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tryfuhl View Post
Considering that the owner/admin started the thread...
LOL... That was my "playful ribbing" line I could have said this thread sounds like it'd be started by Ace...
__________________
Sean Taylor #21 a Redskin forever...

Draft winners, not stars.

Hail to the Redskins
Hail victory
Braves on the warpath
Block for RG3
SkinzWin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 07:35 PM   #27
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,475
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Even if you did pick him with the #10 spot, who the hell would open the running lanes up in between the tackles? A RB at the #10 spot is a horrible choice for a team with so many needs. Our DL needs some serious upgrades.
NC_Skins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 07:51 PM   #28
Special Teams
 
BuckSkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern Ohio
Age: 45
Posts: 232
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12 View Post
Ingram is a great player, I thought of E. Smith too as somebody mentioned earlier. That said, he's a good prospect but not a once in a decade rb. For us to take a rb at 10 he'd have to be special. I see Ingram as a good, potentially great nfl player, but not a great enough prospect for this team to take at 10 given the defensive talent in the draft.
I think Ingram is a definite talent, and I would enjoy anointing him the heir to Portis. freddyg12 is right though... he is not a once a decade back. There were several experts that even questioned if he was even the best back at Georgia this past season. So.... to answer the original question of this thread, regrettably "no".
__________________
"Any Nation willing to give up a little freedom, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
BuckSkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 08:20 PM   #29
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,475
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 44ever View Post
I could start a list of RB's that got it done without a great O-line. Lets say we upgrade the D-Line, what do we do about a QB, RB, WR? Either way we need both. Personally, I would rather start on the O side of the ball.

Get me AJ Green at WR, Ingram at RB, Newton or Locker at QB to start.
Start that list and chances are it doesn't go past 3 names. (sanders, campbell, dickerson are the only three that come to mind)

So you are going to remotely compare this kid to those 3 I mentioned?...lol




Also, I don't feel there is a QB worth a 1st round selection this year. It's bad when Mel Kiper even says he doesn't feel any of these QBs in the draft are "franchise QBs". LOL @ your Cam Newton. If anything, I think I've shown enough material to prove my point about red flags, and this kid has a shit ton of them. I'll say it again, the team that drafts Cam Newton expecting this kid to play in the first 2 years are going to be set back 4-5 years. Let's hope it's not this franchise, we know all too well what having a lame QB can do for your franchise. (shuler, ramsey, campbell, brunell)
NC_Skins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 08:36 PM   #30
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,475
Re: Mark Ingram at #10?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 44ever View Post
Portis can go on that list. that makes 4

Guess we watch it play out and see.
Wrong. We had a good offensive line (Samuels, Kendal, Thomas, and Jansen ring a bell??) We see what happened to Portis once that OL started to falter. (Remember 2009 season??)



Quote:
Originally Posted by 44ever View Post
BTW, I would rather Locker than Newton but we got to get started somewhere...
I think Locker fits our system better than Newton (or any other one for that matter), but I wouldn't value him as a 1st rounder either.
NC_Skins is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.27373 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25