- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Get rid of Mark Ingram now!
Posted on 11/7/16 at 3:49 pm to TideSaint
Posted on 11/7/16 at 3:49 pm to TideSaint
quote:
He's lost three fumbles in six years
He's actually lost 5 with 9 fumbles over all. Considering his "lack" of carries that's too many.
He had a great game though, the o-line probably should've received a game ball along with Ingram. The team gained 154 yards before contact on the ground. He had to feel like he was back in college.
Posted on 11/7/16 at 3:57 pm to Magazine St
quote:
He's actually lost 5 with 9 fumbles over all. Considering his "lack" of carries that's too many.
We've already been over his fumble rate in comparison to other running backs. It is well below others
Posted on 11/7/16 at 4:00 pm to TigerBait1127
quote:
We've already been over his fumble rate in comparison to other running backs. It is well below others
Your fumble rate comparison does nothing for me, less carries than the other guys per season is all I need to see. If he averaged 300-325 carries a year with that "fumble rate" then I'd be impressed. Like it has been said before, there are many variables to consider when looking at stats.
This post was edited on 11/7/16 at 4:04 pm
Posted on 11/7/16 at 4:05 pm to Magazine St
quote:
Your fumble rate comparison does nothing for me, less carries than the other guys per season is all I need to see. If he averaged 300-325 carries a year with that "fumble rate" then I'd be impressed.
Do you understand what the word "rate" means?
That literally means that it is adjusted for the number of carries.
DERP
Posted on 11/7/16 at 4:14 pm to TigerBait1127
quote:
Do you understand what the word "rate" means?
That literally means that it is adjusted for the number of carries.
Posted on 11/7/16 at 5:35 pm to TideSaint
He was not worth the first round pick they gave for him. He is average on his best day. The niners are worse than the saints on run defense, let that sink in.
Posted on 11/7/16 at 5:41 pm to shaqtaw
quote:
The niners are worse than the saints on run defense, let that sink in.
Yeah and so are 14 other teams. Let THAT sink in
Posted on 11/7/16 at 6:48 pm to shaqtaw
quote:
He is average on his best day
Don't be fricking ridiculous
Posted on 11/7/16 at 6:49 pm to shaqtaw
quote:
The niners are worse than the saints on run defense, let that sink in.
The saints run defense has been pretty good outside of 1 game....
quote:
He is average on his best day.
Yet, against the same defense, he ran for more yards and more ypc (a lot more ypc) than Gurley, Stewart, Michael, Elliott, David Johnson, McCoy, and Rodgers.
So yea, they suck, but on his "best day" he outperformed a lot of the NFL's best backs
This post was edited on 11/7/16 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 11/7/16 at 6:53 pm to Hoodoo Man
quote:
Well, does anyone here have anything to say for themselves?
I'm happy for Ingram, but it was against San Fran...who's absolute dog shite. If he looks like that again against Denver then I'll give him a little more credit.
Posted on 11/7/16 at 6:59 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
I'm happy for Ingram, but it was against San Fran...who's absolute dog shite
I hate when people say crap like this. This is the NFL. All teams are professional and there is little variance in the overall talent between teams. It's not like college where a running back from a power 5 school can rack up ridiculous yardage against Southwestern Central Oregon State or something. Ingram rushed for 158 yards on a 10.5 ypc average. I don't give a shite if it was against the 49ers or the Seahawks or the Bills. Dude brought it yesterday and ran with a fury. Give credit where it's due.
Posted on 11/7/16 at 7:04 pm to ClientNumber9
and honestly his best play may have been the screen for a TD
Posted on 11/7/16 at 7:07 pm to TigerBait1127
Ingram needs an outside source of fury. Some players have the ability to stay self motivated.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 9:43 am to Cajunate
I felt sorry for him so I voted him this week's nfl fedex ground player of the week
Posted on 11/8/16 at 10:06 am to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
I'm happy for Ingram, but it was against San Fran...who's absolute dog shite. If he looks like that again against Denver then I'll give him a little more credit.
SF: 32nd against the run (193.0 YPG)
Denver: 29th against the run (128.6 YPG)
SF: 32nd YPC (5.25)
Denver: T-23rd YPC (4.40)
so still bad, but not Ingram did skew SF's worse lol
Posted on 11/8/16 at 10:25 am to Magazine St
quote:
He had a great game though, the o-line probably should've received a game ball along with Ingram. The team gained 154 yards before contact on the ground. He had to feel like he was back in college.
It was SF, the worst run defense in the league by 60 yrds a game. It aint even close how bad they are.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 11:37 am to Chad504boy
quote:
Ingram needs an outside source of fury. Some players have the ability to stay self motivated.
This quote says it all
Posted on 11/8/16 at 11:46 am to Big D of the LC
That's fine.
Did you see Fitzpatrick after he got benched? I say bench him every 4th quarter lol
Did you see Fitzpatrick after he got benched? I say bench him every 4th quarter lol
Posted on 11/8/16 at 12:58 pm to ShlikStyck
quote:
It was SF, the worst run defense in the league by 60 yrds a game. It aint even close how bad they are.
Well less than 50, but I guess the point still stands.
And no other running back has done what he's done, despite playing a schedule against most of the NFL's best backs
This post was edited on 11/8/16 at 1:00 pm
Popular
Back to top



2





