Started By
Message

re: SFP's RB argument

Posted on 4/29/11 at 8:38 pm to
Posted by F machine
Member since Jun 2009
11886 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 8:38 pm to
I obviously don't think Ingram is going to be emmitt smith. Was just trying to make a point.

And did you watch McFadden play last year? Dude blew up, so I'm not sure what you are trying to say with that.
Posted by whodatfan
Member since Mar 2008
21907 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 8:39 pm to
Mcfadboom
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
60684 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 8:47 pm to
quote:

And did you watch McFadden play last year? Dude blew up, so I'm not sure what you are trying to say with that.


He had 1157 yds rushing and 7 TD. That's not bad, but not "blowing up either. His 2 previous season's he didn't even crack 500 yards. So playing in the SEC didn't exactly help him. I was responding to some dumb arse that asked what conference Leshure came from (the B1G), which implies that playing in a "weaker" league in college means a player is not as good, which is or course non sense.
Posted by F machine
Member since Jun 2009
11886 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 8:51 pm to
I understood what you were trying to say. McFadden also had 500 yards receiving and averaged 5.2 yards a carry and almost 11 yards a catch. I'd call that blowing up considering his two seasons before that.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
60684 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:03 pm to
1600 total yards is very good, I'll give you that, but still a top 5 pick should have been doing that from day 1. Arain Foster was and undrafted FA and ran for more than 1600 and had 600 rec.
Posted by F machine
Member since Jun 2009
11886 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:07 pm to
Yeah took him longer than expected but he still got there. And you don't find a 2100 total yard back undrafted everyday despite what others on here say.
Posted by jacks40
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2007
11877 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:14 pm to
quote:

Yeah took him longer than expected but he still got there


unfortuantely the Raiders still paid him as a top 5 pick and counted that against their Salary Cap for those years he wasnt running/catching for 1600+ yards
Posted by crimsonsaint
Member since Nov 2009
37667 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

what does that have to do with anything? Jesus you SECtards are ridiculous and make us all look like goobers.


It's relevant when you're comparing college stats wingnut. Surely you understand that.

Posted by Michael J
Member since Jan 2011
1673 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:39 pm to
quote:

Last night SFP questioned the Saints giving up so much for Ingram. Most argued they didn't give up anything for such a talent. As the draft progressed we've seen what the Saints could have taken. Without giving up the #1 pick next year the Saints could've taken Mikel Leshoure at 56. Here are the stats of the 2 RBs in their best seasons:

Ingram: 271/1658/17 6.1 ypc 32/334/3 receiving

Leshoure: 281/1697/17 6.0 ypc 17/196/3 receiving

Ingram: 5'9 1/8" 215 4.62 40

Leshoure: 5'11 5/8" 227 4.56 40








Hindsight is 20/20 but it seems SFP was right.


I tend to think that Sean Peyton and Mickey Loomis know just alittle bit more about evaluating NFL talent and what better fits what the Saints want to do, than some fricking loser on the internet who fancies himself as a football expert.
Posted by crimsonsaint
Member since Nov 2009
37667 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:40 pm to
quote:

Arain Foster was and undrafted FA and ran for more than 1600 and had 600 rec.


Another SEC product. And DMac had great stats last year. Keep referencing SECtard running backs though.
Posted by Brettesaurus Rex
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2009
38261 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 9:50 pm to
And Ingram's stats were done in the SEC winning a Heisman and National Title. What has Leshoure done?
Posted by Smitty55
Rayville
Member since Oct 2009
460 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 10:02 pm to
I dont see what the problem is. now i said not to waste a 1st on him , but that was thinking we were not gonna make any moves. we got what need where two top players fell to us. its not like we gave up our entire draft like atlanta did to get julio. most likely we make a great run in the playoffs or the superbowl, and that draft pik will be a low.
Posted by jdrumdog
baton rouge, la
Member since Jan 2010
7655 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 10:03 pm to
wait, so combine numbers mean nothing..only the film, except....now they do?

When Ingram starts plowing people over in the preseason, I"ll point and laugh.
Posted by JJ27
Member since Sep 2004
61866 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 10:41 pm to
quote:

wait, so combine numbers mean nothing..only the film, except....now they do?


Que? I posted their stats from their best season.

quote:

When Ingram starts plowing people over in the preseason, I"ll point and laugh.


At who? For the FOURTH time in this thread, I WANTED INGRAM AT #24. I LOVE HIM AS A SAINT. THIS THREAD WAS LOOKING AT SFP'S ARGUMENT LAST NIGHT.
Posted by whodatfan
Member since Mar 2008
21907 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 10:46 pm to
quote:

THIS THREAD WAS LOOKING AT SFP'S ARGUMENT LAST NIGHT.


Well that was your first mistake.
Posted by MSTiger33
Member since Oct 2007
21420 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 11:01 pm to
quote:

Last night SFP questioned the Saints giving up so much for Ingram. Most argued they didn't give up anything for such a talent. As the draft progressed we've seen what the Saints could have taken. Without giving up the #1 pick next year the Saints could've taken Mikel Leshoure at 56. Here are the stats of the 2 RBs in their best seasons:

Ingram: 271/1658/17 6.1 ypc 32/334/3 receiving

Leshoure: 281/1697/17 6.0 ypc 17/196/3 receiving

Ingram: 5'9 1/8" 215 4.62 40

Leshoure: 5'11 5/8" 227 4.56 40




Emmitt Smith's best college year

284/1599/14 ypc 5.6 10/72/0 receiving


You people would have apparently thrown yourselves off the fricking Mississippi River Bridge if we drafted Emmitt.



Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
109456 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 11:10 pm to
quote:

The pick happened less than 24 hours ago and you're talking about hindsight? Why don't we let at least one season go by before you start raiding Loomis' house with torches and pitchforks?


Indeed, one of the goofiest applications of the term "hindsight" I've ever seen employed.
Posted by JJ27
Member since Sep 2004
61866 posts
Posted on 4/29/11 at 11:15 pm to
I overestimated the intelligence of this board. I think the Rant has taken a firm 2nd place on here for ridiculous posts. It's like talking to a 3rd grader...I could say it a 5th time, but that would just be redundant.
Posted by H-Town Tiger
Member since Nov 2003
60684 posts
Posted on 4/30/11 at 12:02 am to
quote:

Emmitt Smith's best college year

284/1599/14 ypc 5.6 10/72/0 receiving


That for 11 game cochise. When Smith played there was no 12 game season, no SEC CG and they didn't count bowls.

So if we take 1599 and divided it by 11 we get 145/game

Ingram got 1658 in 14 games that;s 121 / game.

145>121.

If Smith played 14 games and avg 145 he would have had 2030 yards. By Contrast Ingram would have had 1330 for 11 games.
quote:

You people would have apparently thrown yourselves off the fricking Mississippi River Bridge if we drafted Emmitt.




HOLY frickING shite. Can you fricking read?

for the 50millionth time ITS NOT THAT WE THINK INGRAM WILL BE A BAD PLAYER. WE DON'T LIKE TAKING A RUNNING BACK IN THE 1ST ROUND BECAUSE THERE IS TOO MUCH VALUE OUT THERE IN LATER ROUNDS AND FREE AGENCY AT RUNNING BACK. IS THAT REALLY SO HARD TO frickING UNDERSTAND!!!

Oh and for the record, it would have been jerking off if the Saints took Emmitt Smith in 1990. But that was 21 frickING YEARS AGO and the NFL is very different now. In 1990, the Saints had a great Defense and a conservative coach who wanted to run the ball and shite for RB. A guy like Smith that could eat up clock would have been perfect for the Jim Mora Dome Patrol Saints. fricking Pierre Thomas or Chris Ivroy would have been huge upgrades to the RB's the Saints had in 90, 91, 92 after Hilliard got hurt.

That is not the type of team the Saints have now for frick sake. We are a pass first team with a suspect defensive front. The problems at running back in 2010 were due to injuries, not because the RB's we have can't produces.
This post was edited on 4/30/11 at 12:05 am
Posted by Acreboy
Member since Nov 2005
38568 posts
Posted on 4/30/11 at 12:15 am to
quote:

Leshoure
oh so Leshoure did that against the best defenses in CFB too?
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram