- 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: So what happens when Ivory returns?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:03 pm to John McClane
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:03 pm to John McClane
quote:You just said Ingram would have a better career. That's not conclusive?
This is what I agree with. The sample size is too small to make a conclusion
0
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:04 pm to Gugich22
quote:please, enlighten me how I am wrong in saying that you can't compare their statistics accurately: different o-line, different teams, different plays, different situational playcalling. Please. fricking enlighten me.
is that you actually realizing how dumb your logic is?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:07 pm to John McClane
quote:
please, enlighten me how I am wrong in saying that you can't compare their statistics accurately: different o-line, different teams, different plays, different situational playcalling. Please. fricking enlighten me.
by your logic, you can't argue that any single player in NFL history is any better than the next player...
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 8:08 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:10 pm to Gugich22
wow. It's not my fault you can't understand my logic. Your misunderstanding doesn't make it illogical. right now, when you use statistics, those statistics simply are not an accurate measure of either running backs' ability when compared to each other. very simple. it's just too early to tell.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:16 pm to Gugich22
This thread has been very entertaining thus far, read every post.
I think zombie needs to retitle the thread to reflect the turn of events
I think zombie needs to retitle the thread to reflect the turn of events
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:19 pm to ATLienTiger
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:21 pm to John McClane
Statistics aside and your flaw logic aside, it is not that hard to tell which running back has looked better against NFL competition. Did you watch a Saints game when Ivory played last year? Did you? Because if you did, you would see the other running backs had problems running, while Ivory didn't.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:23 pm to 13SaintTiger
quote:you're right, playing different teams does not matter. all defenses are the same. all the same play calls. same game situations (i.e. short yardage, 4th quarter, etc.)
Statistics aside and your flaw logic aside, it is not that hard to tell which running back has looked better against NFL competition. Did you watch a Saints game when Ivory played last year? Did you? Because if you did, you would see the other running backs had problems running, while Ivory didn't.
'flaw logic'?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:27 pm to LSUZombie
Definitely can't wait to see Ivory back, and completely agree it's a great problem to have. We need Pierre for consistency, and Sproles has been lights-out. Ingram's the new guy and his play this year has been pretty good but if it's between him and Ivory, it's no question.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:34 pm to John McClane
quote:
you're right, playing different teams does not matter. all defenses are the same. all the same play calls. same game situations (i.e. short yardage, 4th quarter, etc.)
No, but a back who creates yards when there looks like there are none to be had is a rare thing. I believe Ivory was leading the entire NFL in rushing until he got injured, and it wasn't even close. For a rookie back, that is even more rare. I'm not saying that Ingram won't be good for the Saints - I am not displeased with his average rookie performance. He is, afterall, just a rookie. But to say that you cannot statistically argue that Ivory had a better rookie year start than Ingram is absolutely wrong.
You are right that there are things that you cannot measure in football with statistics and numbers, and perhaps some of that can be used in your argument, but you cannot measure it and it is harder to use in an debate. Don't mean you ill will, just saying...
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 8:36 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:38 pm to tigertroll
quote:Pretty sure that's inaccurate.
I believe Ivory was leading the entire NFL in rushing until he got injured, and it wasn't even close.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:38 pm to tigertroll
quote:good post, but please tell me you see the irony in your absolute language. you pretty much agree that we are comparing apples to oranges, then say that the apples to oranges argument is legit. that's my problem. Personally, I would like to have this argument for the next 8 years while both of them are tearing it up on the field.
No, but a back who creates yards when there looks like there are none to be had is a rare thing. I believe Ivory was leading the entire NFL in rushing until he got injured, and it wasn't even close. For a rookie back, that is even more rare. I'm not saying that Ingram won't be good for the Saints - I am not displeased with his average rookie performance. He is, afterall, just a rookie. But to say that you cannot statistically argue that Ivory had a better rookie year start than Ingram is absolutely wrong. You are right that there are things that you cannot measure in football with statistics and numbers, and perhaps some of that can be used in your argument, but you cannot measure it and it is harder to use in an debate. Don't mean you ill will, just saying...
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:09 pm to John McClane
quote:
so you are telling me that are not in fact comparing statistics for two different running backs who played against different teams in different seasons and making conclusions based on those statistics? yeah, you're a fricking retard.
With your requirements no players could ever be compared for any purpose. As they would all have statistics as different players playing different teams and running different plays in different circumstances in different years.
And you call someone else a f'n retard?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:15 pm to CarrolltonTiger
quote:you mean people who absolutely believe that comparing irrelevant numbers of 2 running backs who play for the same team in different seasons against different teams in different situations and with different offensive linemen personnel is an accurate gauge of success? you seem to be one, so yes, you are included in that category.
With your requirements no players could ever be compared for any purpose. As they would all have statistics as different players playing different teams and running different plays in different circumstances in different years.
And you call someone else a f'n retard?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:20 pm to Gugich22
Things I've learned by reading this thread:
1. Matt Leinart is better than Drew Brees because he won a Heisman and Drew didn't
2. Ryan Leaf may be better than Drew Brees because he didn't play behind the same line, in the same season, and didn't run the same plays
3. JLSIX is an idiot
4. 2
Got it.
1. Matt Leinart is better than Drew Brees because he won a Heisman and Drew didn't
2. Ryan Leaf may be better than Drew Brees because he didn't play behind the same line, in the same season, and didn't run the same plays
3. JLSIX is an idiot
4. 2
Got it.
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 9:22 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:26 pm to 3HourTour
quote:you're right, Ivory's first four games last year are the same as Ingram's first four games this year. Absolutely no difference. Spot on comparison.
Things I've learned by reading this thread:
1. Matt Leinart is better than Drew Brees because he won a Heisman and Drew didn't
2. Ryan Leaf may be better than Drew Brees because he didn't play behind the same line, in the same season, and didn't run the same plays
3. JLSIX is an idiot
4. 2 2
Got it.
Also, way to take shite out of context with your 'heisman' comments. Ingram is a better running back than Ivory. This is bookmarked. Enjoy your crow.
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 9:28 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:27 pm to John McClane
You keep talking about playing different teams with different players yet you use Ingrams heisman as an arguing point. You do realize that was against different teams than Ivory played?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:28 pm to 13SaintTiger
quote:
I say Ivory is better then Ingram, if Ivory wasn't so injury prone he could easily be one of the best backs in the league.
Easily could be as a pure runner but not as a complete back. He has fumbling issues, blocking issues, and has 1 career catch. As a runner he's quick, fast, and powerful.
We'll see how he returns from his injury. This is a Great problem to have
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:31 pm to wally
quote:So his Heisman is not evidence?
You keep talking about playing different teams with different players yet you use Ingrams heisman as an arguing point. You do realize that was against different teams than Ivory played?
by your logic, since Ingram started the season with zero carries for zero yards that means unequivocally that Ivory is better because he has actually played in the NFL. I only brought up the Heisman because someone asked why I believe he will be the better running back. It's a legitimate piece of evidence to use. The kid is a good running back. It's pretty fricking simple. Comparing Ivory's first four games to Ingram's is simply apples and oranges.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:32 pm to John McClane
quote:
JLSIX
you probably the most misguided poster on this board. you go back and forth in your "logic" that apparently only you can follow.
think you need to step back and really see what you are saying
Page 5 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News