quote:
The problem is, you take a stat like "forced seven missed tackles", and you conclude that he forced a missed tackle on half his runs, because he had 14 carries. How do you know he didn't have multiple missed tackles on 2 or 3 runs instead?

You didn't watch the game, it's ok.

quote:
How do we know those missed tackles aren't with like 3 guys trying to tackle him at the end of a run? There is no context there. I personally only saw him break one important tackle in that game. But yeah, if you guys want to claim that this dude whose biggest failure has been that he hasn't lived up to his hype as specifically a power back, now has power, go right ahead.

Again, you clearly didn't watch the game.

quote:
Not trying to diminish anything

Sure you aren't.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by landrywasbeast30

Member since Nov 2011

4904 posts

Posted on 11/11/13 at 9:58 pm to LNCHBOX

quote:
You didn't watch the game, it's ok.

So you are saying for a fact that he broke exactly one tackle on 7 of his 14 runs? See, this is why I don't feel bad when people like you don't agree with things I say.

quote:
Sure you aren't.

Ingram had great numbers. That's a fact. Again, only reason I replied was because everyone was crapping on the OP for saying this doesn't mean all of a sudden Ingram's skills are improved.

What's the more likely scenario, this was one random good game that he won't have again, or Ingram really is improved and this will lead to more big games? If you believe the former, this debate is silly, and you just started this because you don't like the OP. If you believe the latter, good for you for being optimistic.

1 ...

Report Post

Saints Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board