- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Saints to release Pierre Thomas
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:38 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:38 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Pretty nuts. i always thought he had an uncanny ability to ran a screen play.
I think he is arguably the best screen back I've ever seen. And I don't think I'm being a homer. I've never seen anyone else do what he does. He's not fast, but he is so incredibly shifty and his vision is amazing.
0
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:41 pm to bonethug0108
Just seems counterproductive cap wise for the FO to release Pierre to ease the blow of signing Ingram to $5m+
Wouldnt it make more sense to roll with Khiry and address RB in the draft? Between the Saints hitting on UDFA RBs and the ease of transition from college to NFL for RBs--- giving Ingram a big contract will rival the Saints trading up to get him as one of their worst moves in this FO's tenure. Just stupid.
Wouldnt it make more sense to roll with Khiry and address RB in the draft? Between the Saints hitting on UDFA RBs and the ease of transition from college to NFL for RBs--- giving Ingram a big contract will rival the Saints trading up to get him as one of their worst moves in this FO's tenure. Just stupid.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:44 pm to JeffG20
Rita would have kept him
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:46 pm to GynoSandberg
Because we don't trust KRob to carry the load? Because Payton REALLY likes Ingram? Because PT's release is likely more about clearing the backfield than cap room (much like Sproles last year)?
There are reasons and whether they are good or not and whether they work out or not remains to be seen.
There are reasons and whether they are good or not and whether they work out or not remains to be seen.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:52 pm to bonethug0108
you really thought Sproles was abut clearing backfield space and not money? 
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:54 pm to bonethug0108
So you think they cut PT23 in order to appease Ingram?
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:54 pm to bonethug0108
I'd agree with Gyno on this one. Regardless of whether Payton REALLY likes Ingram, it would seem more prudent to not invest a lot of money or cap space into the RB position.
As stated, the Saints have had great success finding UDFA's that are NFL caliber starters/role players and the RB position is one of the easiest transitions from CFB to NFL aside from perhaps pass protection.
As stated, the Saints have had great success finding UDFA's that are NFL caliber starters/role players and the RB position is one of the easiest transitions from CFB to NFL aside from perhaps pass protection.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:57 pm to drizztiger
quote:
Regardless of whether Payton REALLY likes Ingram, it would seem more prudent to not invest a lot of money or cap space into the RB position.
agreed too.
1.75mil is a lot of money when you have none.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:57 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
Because PT's release is likely more about clearing the backfield than cap room (much like Sproles last year)?
I think this as well. We have all complained about the in and out of multiple RB's during a game. hell, a series. "Just give it to a go to back" we all have said.
Find your bell cow CSP said Bill...well maybe.
We will hear soon about the range they are offering MI. No one wants to over pay for MI or anybody.
I worry that more than a few here are going to sh!t all over MI what ever he makes because he will be blamed for the Saints cutting PT.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:58 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
So you think they cut PT23 in order to appease Ingram?
and they cut Sproles last year to clear backfield space...for Travaris Cadet? Who bonethug said wouldnt even make the team
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:58 pm to JeffG20
I will miss PT. When CSP figures out who "The Sources" are that feed these reporters information like this, I got a feeling we are going to miss them too!
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:59 pm to Lester Earl
It was about both. We had better ways to clear a measly $3.5m. It was a two birds with one stone move and Payton even said they wanted to clear some room in the backfield after the most was made.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 5:59 pm to goatmilker
quote:
I think this as well. We have all complained about the in and out of multiple RB's during a game. hell, a series. "Just give it to a go to back" we all have said.
Find your bell cow CSP said Bill...well maybe.
I cant believe people actually think this.
I'm legitimately dumbfounded
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:00 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
It was a two birds with one stone move and Payton even said they wanted to clear some room in the backfield after the most was made.
so we've cut the 2 best pass catching RBs in back to back years to clear space for whom, exactly?
this is strictly money. You're smarter than this. I think.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:03 pm to Lester Earl
No Sproles was cut for more touches for Ingram and Robinson.
Payton for whatever reason thought Cadet could be Sproles in the passing game but definitely not in the run game (only 10 rushes).
They said everyone would make up for Sproles touches and everyone did. Ingram got more catches and runs and Cadet got more catches. Not sure about Robinson's touches as I haven't checked yet.
Payton for whatever reason thought Cadet could be Sproles in the passing game but definitely not in the run game (only 10 rushes).
They said everyone would make up for Sproles touches and everyone did. Ingram got more catches and runs and Cadet got more catches. Not sure about Robinson's touches as I haven't checked yet.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:04 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
1.75mil is a lot of money when you have none
Exactly
Not wanting a crowded backfield doesnt mean it's to make room for Ingram. It could be to make room for Khiry, a FA, a draft pick etc.
And Payton has kept Khiry around this long, he makes $585k, and is productive. Dude ate up nearly 5 ypc last season. Supplement him with Cadet and a mid to late round draft pick and we will be fine.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:05 pm to Lester Earl
I'm not saying money is a nonfactor but $1.75 mil can be cleared in much better ways. Money clearly wasn't the only factor, especially considering his bang for buck.
This post was edited on 3/4/15 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:09 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
It was about both. We had better ways to clear a measly $3.5m. It was a two birds with one stone move
If Sproles would have cost 1mil he would have been kept. At what point did they declare that a move to actively give others touches?
Or did they say the normal coach speak that they were confident in what they had?
Those aren't the same things
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:10 pm to bonethug0108
Well they need to clear more money, buddy. Surely this isn't going to be the only money move this offseason.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 6:12 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
Money clearly wasn't the only factor, especially considering his bang for buck.
I don't think so either. I think Payton realizes that Running back's need more than 5-10 touches a game in order to be effective.
the days of having 3-4 backs have 5 touches a piece are over. Ingram and Robinson and most any other back needs rhythm and a feel for the game in order to be effective.
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News