PDA

View Full Version : ESPNs Robert Smith's comment on Mark Ingram


katnip
10-06-2010, 09:57 PM
Did any1 else the other days College Football Live?

They were talking about Alabama of course. And Robert Smith was talking how if Mark Ingram was in the NFL today he'd be the 3rd best right behind AP/AD & Chris Johnson.

Any1 else buy into Mark Ingram this much? I can see numbers wise. Especially if he lands with Brady's Patriots. I mean.. Antowain Smith managed to put up 1000+ yards his first year with them.

Don Vito
10-06-2010, 10:09 PM
Yeah well aren't the same team we are then, we can't run the ball like we used to.

That is kind of an iffy statement by Smith, but a lot of people compare Ingram to Ray Rice and a lot of people had Rice at the top of that tier right behind CJ2K and AD at the beginning of this season. I could see Ingram being a stud in the NFL, one of the top backs in the league perhaps, but he doesn't have that AD athletic ability that a back almost needs to have to be drafted in the top 10. I do think he could be an All-Pro though.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-06-2010, 10:11 PM
It's a silly statement, but yes, Ingram is a really good prospect.

katnip
10-06-2010, 10:16 PM
I don't know. I like his game. He seems like a very humble kid. But I see him as like a Thomas Jones. I don't see him drafted top 10 like Jones was. But I can see him putting up #'s like Thomas Jones. I can see him putting up good career numbers. But never being the game changer like say Chris Johnson can be. I know, unfair comparing a 2000 yard nfl rusher.. Just saying though.

Just something about Ingram. Maybe the fact he benefits from being on Alabama.

descendency
10-06-2010, 11:05 PM
Just something about Ingram. Maybe the fact he benefits from being on Alabama.

From what? Being behind their average OL? The average QB? Their severely under-performing WRs? If you ask any defender in the SEC who the best running back is and they don't say Mark Ingram, they're going to say Trent Richardson.

Ingram and Richarson are the best 1-2 in the country, by far. The only reason Ryan Williams is the #2 back in this class is because Richardson can't declare.

bigbuc
10-06-2010, 11:35 PM
Ingram has some of the best feet I have ever seen on a football player period. The cuts this kid can make are unbelievable... pair that with low pad level he runs with and you get a monster.

I'm a Bucs fan and if we can't get him I hope he goes to the Redskins! Would be nuts to see him behind that one cut a go zone blocking.

BuddyCHRIST
10-06-2010, 11:54 PM
He's definitely a great prospect, he does so many things that you can't teach and that really separate the great from the good. His balance, vision and wiggle are very rare. Richardson might wow you more, but give me Ingram every time.

GB12
10-07-2010, 12:06 AM
I've got a bad feeling about Ingram. I can't really explain why, but I think he's going to be a slightly below average back in the NFL.

FUNBUNCHER
10-07-2010, 12:30 AM
Yeah well aren't the same team we are then, we can't run the ball like we used to.

That is kind of an iffy statement by Smith, but a lot of people compare Ingram to Ray Rice and a lot of people had Rice at the top of that tier right behind CJ2K and AD at the beginning of this season. I could see Ingram being a stud in the NFL, one of the top backs in the league perhaps, but he doesn't have that AD athletic ability that a back almost needs to have to be drafted in the top 10. I do think he could be an All-Pro though.


IMO the ONLY thing AD has over Ingram is straight line speed. Ingram can cut, has vision, is physical and has the ability to make people miss.

I don't know if he's a top 5 position player in the NFL, but I do see multiple pro bowls in his future.

Shanahan would LOVE this kid forever.

katnip
10-07-2010, 12:36 AM
I've got a bad feeling about Ingram. I can't really explain why, but I think he's going to be a slightly below average back in the NFL.

Ahh. Someone else feels the same way.

D-Unit
10-07-2010, 01:00 AM
I would agree with Robert Smith. Just because he isn't in the NFL now doesn't mean he wouldn't rip it up if he were already there... because he will rip it up when he does get there. People have a hard time for some reason in accepting the concept that college players are really that good. For some reason these players have to "prove it first" in order to make believers. I'm sorry, but I've never shared that frame of thought.

Is Ingram that good? Yes, he is. I would put him ahead of MJD, Ray Rice, Gore, SJax, Turner... easily.

vidae
10-07-2010, 01:10 AM
I would agree with Robert Smith. Just because he isn't in the NFL now doesn't mean he wouldn't rip it up if he were already there... because he will rip it up when he does get there. People have a hard time for some reason in accepting the concept that college players are really that good. For some reason these players have to "prove it first" in order to make believers. I'm sorry, but I've never shared that frame of thought.

Is Ingram that good? Yes, he is. I would put him ahead of MJD, Ray Rice, Gore, SJax, Turner... easily.

Really? Maybe one or two of them, but all of them EASILY?

katnip
10-07-2010, 01:23 AM
I would agree with Robert Smith. Just because he isn't in the NFL now doesn't mean he wouldn't rip it up if he were already there... because he will rip it up when he does get there. People have a hard time for some reason in accepting the concept that college players are really that good. For some reason these players have to "prove it first" in order to make believers. I'm sorry, but I've never shared that frame of thought.

Is Ingram that good? Yes, he is. I would put him ahead of MJD, Ray Rice, Gore, SJax, Turner... easily.

I'm tired

I just don't see Ingram being special in the NFL. I could see him being good. But not a game-changer. I don't think NFL players is on another level then college players. I used to recommend AP OU videos on any football fan I came across. Same with Santonio Holmes, Megatron, Mario Williams..

I know he's shiftier, probably more athletic then Run DMC. But all people would say was how McFadden dominated the tough SEC, he's a freak, etc etc.. BTW. I never thought McFadden would dominate in the NFL. Anyways.. IMO- Ingram>McFadden

&

S-Jax > Ingram.. MJD > Ingram.. Gore > Ingram.. Ingram's on par with Rice & Turner to me.

Halsey
10-07-2010, 05:56 AM
I just wonder if people would be talking about Ingram this much if he didn't play for Alabama, running behind their O-line, for a team that hasn't lost a game in forever. And it's not like defenses can ignore Bama's passing game and focus on stopping only on the run. Bama can throw it to Julio Jones or Marquis Maze when they need to.

fenikz
10-07-2010, 06:45 AM
Just wondering am I the only person who see Emmitt Smith in him

Shane P. Hallam
10-07-2010, 06:56 AM
Just wondering am I the only person who see Emmitt Smith in him

That's been cited a lot as a comparison. Likely very high end, but he can be a workhorse like Smith. Is he quite that talented? No, I don't think so. Doesn't mean he's not a Top 10 pick. 3rd most talented back though? Eh, I wouldn't go that far. I want to see some numbers. I want to see him at the combine.

Halsey
10-07-2010, 07:18 AM
One thing that might help Ingram in April will be the fact that he hasn't had a huge load to carry throughout college. He was a backup as a true freshman and hasn't been a 25+ carry back every game since becoming the starter. He has a nice balance of lots of game experience while not being worked to death in college.

papageorgio
10-07-2010, 07:23 AM
I wonder if people said the same thing about Ron Dayne when he was coming out of Wisconsin.

619
10-07-2010, 07:25 AM
One thing that might help Ingram in April will be the fact that he hasn't had a huge load to carry throughout college. He was a backup as a true freshman and hasn't been a 25+ carry back every game since becoming the starter. He has a nice balance of lots of game experience while not being worked to death in college.

Yep. It's better than being run into the ground and turning out to be another Javon Ringer.

Razor
10-07-2010, 10:25 AM
Ingram and Richarson are the best 1-2 in the country, by far. The only reason Ryan Williams is the #2 back in this class is because Richardson can't declare.

Oh hi... I'm LaMichael James who, y'know, is just as good a prospect as either of those those two guys you just mentioned.

http://sportsthenandnow.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/LaMichael-James-OU.jpg

The hype machine is just starting for this kid....

Just to clarify... I love Ingram as a prospect, but no way he would instantly be the 3rd best back in the NFL. He's going to be good, I know. But that's a bit much.

BuddyCHRIST
10-07-2010, 10:29 AM
LaMichael James is more of a change of pace guy to me, small and comes from the spread offense which gives him a ton of open running lanes.

Sniper
10-07-2010, 10:31 AM
Oh hi... I'm LaMichael James who, y'know, is just as good a prospect as either of those those two guys you just mentioned.

LaMichael James has wet dreams of being 75 percent of the pro prospect that Ingram and Richardson are.

Razor
10-07-2010, 10:31 AM
LaMichael James is more of a change of pace guy to me, small and comes from the spread offense which gives him a ton of open running lanes.

Yeah, I know. That's also why I have Ingram rated higher when it comes to the draft. But I think James can make the transition to the NFL, his cuts are just insane, he has great vision and once this guy sees daylight you can just forget about it. Needless to say that I'm lusting for James haha...

LizardState
10-07-2010, 10:59 AM
Ingram in NE is intriguing, they can have pretty much whoever they want. RBs have a short shelf life there as well as everywhere else now I guess.

Bellichick is in position to control the early rds. next April as usual with the extra picks they've acquired, I expect their phones to be ringing early & often & the Patriots to wheel & deal, at the end of the day Bellichick will reload everywhere including RB.

PrimetimeTheDon
10-07-2010, 11:03 AM
My thoughts are I disagree. I do not think he is that good.

wonderbredd24
10-07-2010, 11:31 AM
Top 3? It would really depend on where Ingram was playing, but I expect Ingram will be a very, very good NFL running back and the reaction from this board isn't surprising as it has been underrating the hell out of Mark Ingram for awhile.

Coming into the year, people were thinking Ingram would be the backup. While he was injured and Trent Richardson did some damage, people were asking if Mark Ingram would even get carries when he got healthy. Then Ingram comes back and just kills it and he still is getting underappreciated.

On a team like the Jets or San Francisco or Cleveland with the blocking they have, Mark Ingram would be a nightmare for the opposition, because Ingram will just wear teams down and if he gets to the 2nd level, DBs are going to struggle to get him on the ground.

I think he's exactly like Emmitt Smith and if he gets a mauling OLine like the Cowboys had, he's going to dominate. He's not exceptional at any one thing, but he's very good at everything.

D-Unit
10-07-2010, 11:36 AM
Lamichael James has the skinny leg syndrome. Be wary of him in the NFL. Ingram is thick in his base, has a nice compact build, great balance, is shifty and has elite vision and driving force when he hits the hole. All the elements I look for in a RB that will be successful in the NFL.

The combine results would do nothing to change my opinion of him because his game is not purely based off speed.

IndyColtScout
10-07-2010, 11:46 AM
I don't think its impossible, but maybe he meant 3rd best Young RB.

I buy that.

Also, I think Ingram has HOF potential for a prospect. I think he's the best RB prospect since AP. He's in the same class as a young LT or an Emmitt Smith and I don't think thats a bold statement.

wonderbredd24
10-07-2010, 11:49 AM
Lamichael James has the skinny leg syndrome. Be wary of him in the NFL. Ingram is thick in his base, has a nice compact build, great balance, is shifty and has elite vision and driving force when he hits the hole. All the elements I look for in a RB that will be successful in the NFL.

The combine results would do nothing to change my opinion of him because his game is not purely based off speed.
LaMichael James is Eric Metcalf. Use him as such.

Returns, slot, outside runs, etc.

Brown Leader
10-07-2010, 12:07 PM
Ingram looks like a powered up Ahmad Bradshaw to me which would put him top 5.

RaiderNation
10-07-2010, 01:36 PM
Ingram is a top 15 pick in this draft, not a all pro RB in college. He is going to be really good but to compare him to those 2 is dumb right now

Razor
10-07-2010, 02:12 PM
Lamichael James has the skinny leg syndrome. Be wary of him in the NFL. Ingram is thick in his base, has a nice compact build, great balance, is shifty and has elite vision and driving force when he hits the hole. All the elements I look for in a RB that will be successful in the NFL.

The combine results would do nothing to change my opinion of him because his game is not purely based off speed.

I am. Normally I shy away from RBs with skinny legs (or players in general), but in this case I'm just convinced he'll manage the transition. But I shouldn't hi-jack this thread as well, I should create a LaMichael James thread.

Ingram is a great prospect. I think he has everything you look for besides elite speed.

Don Vito
10-07-2010, 03:10 PM
IMO the ONLY thing AD has over Ingram is straight line speed. Ingram can cut, has vision, is physical and has the ability to make people miss.

I don't know if he's a top 5 position player in the NFL, but I do see multiple pro bowls in his future.

Shanahan would LOVE this kid forever.

Ingram looks like the real deal, but Peterson had that "wow" factor coming out. He is just a rare, once in a lifetime physical specimen. Ingram has a ton of physical ability and looks like a very complete back so it isn't a knock on him, it's just AD coming out was a 6-2 220 freak of nature who also showed he could produce with the best.

When it is all said and done, I could see Ingram going top 10. But even since Peterson was drafted, the value of RB's in this league has changed a lot.

RealityCheck
10-07-2010, 04:27 PM
Brady, Ingram, Woodhead, Welker, Julio, Edelman.

DEENASTY.

Rabscuttle
10-07-2010, 08:03 PM
Ingram has such rare patience. He just sits back there and lets his blocks develop in front of him. I understand people hedging because he plays for a team that has success running no matter who they plug in at rb, but Ingram looks a lot like Smith to me in how he just sees his opportunity and takes it.

descendency
10-07-2010, 10:00 PM
Ingram's patience is what worries me actually. Being a ZBS team, I would rather have Richardson who is the best one cut back in the country.

But on the right team, I could see Ingram being a top 5 RB in the NFL as a rookie. If he lands behind a good PBS running team, he would be a top RB very shortly.

703SKINS202
10-07-2010, 10:26 PM
He actually reminds me somewhat of an ex-bama player, Shaun Alexander, just with more athleticism. Ingram has a lot of great qualities going for him. He runs with great pad level, has underrated agility/cutting ability and probably his best attribute is his ability to read his blocking and the defense. I don't think he garners top 5 consideration due to the fact that he doesn't have elite athleticism but the kid is a straight up baller and most importantly a winner. I see 3-4 Pro Bowls from him under the right offensive scheme with a chance to be a top 5 back down the road. I don't like the projections of him going to NE, just don't think his potential would be maximized there. I would love if the Skins could somehow land this kid, would be a beast in Shanhan's ZBS.

J-Mike88
10-07-2010, 10:55 PM
I don't know. I like his game. He seems like a very humble kid. But I see him as like a Thomas Jones. I don't see him drafted top 10 like Jones was. But I can see him putting up #'s like Thomas Jones.I see that comp. Very similar..... and Thomas has been released by what, 5 NFL teams? Interesting.

metafour
10-07-2010, 11:16 PM
From what? Being behind their average OL?

LOOOL.

Alabama's OL gets called for like 2 holding penalties a year. In Ingram's second game back this season he scored a "50 yard touchdown" on a play where the center blatantly held his man.

tjsunstein
10-07-2010, 11:42 PM
Wow, this is just absurd. We all know it depends on what team he gets drafted by before determining where he'd rank among RBs.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 12:00 AM
Wow, this is just absurd. We all know it depends on what team he gets drafted by before determining where he'd rank among RBs.
So if Adrian Peterson was on a bad team then he wouldn't be considered as good as he is now?

That sounds absurd to me.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-08-2010, 12:46 AM
So if Adrian Peterson was on a bad team then he wouldn't be considered as good as he is now?

That sounds absurd to me.

I guess? Steven Jackson doesn't get half the real recognition that Peterson gets among casual football fans and he's been as impressive if not more so for an awful team.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 02:30 AM
I guess? Steven Jackson doesn't get half the real recognition that Peterson gets among casual football fans and he's been as impressive if not more so for an awful team.
So you think that if Adrian Peterson were on the Rams that he would be in Jackson's shoes and vice versa? Hmm... I don't think I agree with that one. Jackson isn't really durable (You could blame his upright running style rather than team), he seems to gain yardage, but never gets to the endzone. Maybe if SJax ran a 4.35 40 like AD then he'd have more breakaway TDs. Talent wise, they're 2 different specimens. I don't think comparing AD to SJax makes for a good comparison. SJax gets a lot credit for what he doesn't live up to on the field and I can't entirely blame his team. I think his reputation is fair. People have had him pegged as a Top 5 RB before in his career, yet he has only let down those who ever believed that.

Sure a situation can benefit or hurt a RB's success and reputation. I'm not saying that doesn't play a factor, but when you're talking about the talent of the player, it will remain the same regardless. Otherwise, RBs would be easily replaceable. Tennessee losing CJ wouldn't hurt, Minny losing AD wouldn't hurt... and we all know that it would. When you're talking about elite RBs who can carry teams on their shoulders, the situation they land in matters less.

The statement tjsunstein made seems too extreme. Maybe he's talking fantasy football wise. Is that how we rank RBs these days?

FUNBUNCHER
10-08-2010, 02:34 AM
Ingram looks like the real deal, but Peterson had that "wow" factor coming out. He is just a rare, once in a lifetime physical specimen. Ingram has a ton of physical ability and looks like a very complete back so it isn't a knock on him, it's just AD coming out was a 6-2 220 freak of nature who also showed he could produce with the best.

When it is all said and done, I could see Ingram going top 10. But even since Peterson was drafted, the value of RB's in this league has changed a lot.

AD was 212-214# at the combine. Is he 220# now? Not sure.

He's always been stronger/more physical for his size than anyone would expect given his build, but as RBs go, at his height, he's a little thin.

If my team needed an elite RB prospect, as of right now he's the guy I would want.
Whoever mentioned Ingram's balance is absolutely correct IMO and one of Ingram's traits that's most impressive. He's not a guy you can throw a shoulder pad at and expect him to fall down, and little CBs who don't wrap up on him and wait for reinforcements will get trucked.

Saints-Tigers
10-08-2010, 02:51 AM
Besides a lot of other guys, Stephen Jackson is so much better at every facet that it really isn't funny to compare them.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-08-2010, 03:40 AM
So you think that if Adrian Peterson were on the Rams that he would be in Jackson's shoes and vice versa? Hmm... I don't think I agree with that one. Jackson isn't really durable (You could blame his upright running style rather than team), he seems to gain yardage, but never gets to the endzone. Maybe if SJax ran a 4.35 40 like AD then he'd have more breakaway TDs. Talent wise, they're 2 different specimens. I don't think comparing AD to SJax makes for a good comparison. SJax gets a lot credit for what he doesn't live up to on the field and I can't entirely blame his team. I think his reputation is fair. People have had him pegged as a Top 5 RB before in his career, yet he has only let down those who ever believed that.

Has Jackson really let people down? He's posted had a few massive seasons, including one where he racked up the 6th most scrimmage yards in NFL history. As for injuries, he's started one less game the last three years than Peterson.

I don't think you can lay the lack of touchdowns at the feet of Jackson. The guy put up 1700+ scrimmage yards with good averages last year with a crap offensive line and no passing game at all. It was an amazing season long performance from him; one that almost no one witnessed or appreciated. The lack of success in the red zone is quite obviously the result of that offense (we do, after all, know he can score after his 16 TD season in '06).

Not taking a runners offense into account is a mistake. Would Adrian Peterson still break big runs and be fun to watch on a bad team? Sure. Would his average and touchdowns plummet if he were on the 2009 St. Louis Rams? You bet your ass.

I can name two runners better than Jackson (AP and CJ). After that, there's not a single runner I could justify picking over him right now. I think he's proven plenty as a Ram and I would contend that anyone who thinks otherwise simply hasn't had the pleasure of watching him.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 03:59 AM
Has Jackson really let people down? He's posted had a few massive seasons, including one where he racked up the 6th most scrimmage yards in NFL history. As for injuries, he's started one less game the last three years than Peterson.

I don't think you can lay the lack of touchdowns at the feet of Jackson. The guy put up 1700+ scrimmage yards with good averages last year with a crap offensive line and no passing game at all. It was an amazing season long performance from him; one that almost no one witnessed or appreciated. The lack of success in the red zone is quite obviously the result of that offense (we do, after all, know he can score after his 16 TD season in '06).

Not taking a runners offense into account is a mistake. Would Adrian Peterson still break big runs and be fun to watch on a bad team? Sure. Would his average and touchdowns plummet if he were on the 2009 St. Louis Rams? You bet your ass.

I can name two runners better than Jackson (AP and CJ). After that, there's not a single runner I could justify picking over him right now. I think he's proven plenty as a Ram and I would contend that anyone who thinks otherwise simply hasn't had the pleasure of watching him.
So is he really as underrated as you project the public to think then? For the sake of not hijacking this thread, I'll repeat that I think Jackson's reputation is fair. Is Jackson as good as AD? I noticed that you don't think so (above post), but you tried to state earlier that he should be. So I sense a little contradiction there.

I didn't say a RB's success didn't depend on the team. That'd be ludicrous. I said the RB's talent doesn't depend on the team. Hopefully, you don't twist what I'm trying say again.

Saints-Tigers
10-08-2010, 04:18 AM
I think he's as good as AD, or better. So yea, I think he's chronically under appreciated by the public, whose opinion doesn't really hold much sway on me.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 04:38 AM
I think he's as good as AD, or better. So yea, I think he's chronically under appreciated by the public, whose opinion doesn't really hold much sway on me.
Haha. This thread is officially hijacked.

Sorry, but this isn't about an AD vs SJax comparison thread about who is better.

Shane P. Hallam
10-08-2010, 05:02 AM
I like Ingram and think this could end up as true by Smith, but this likely would have been said about Reggie Bush. Though very different players, that's what happens with high pick Heisman winners. Perhaps overcredited.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 11:58 AM
I like Ingram and think this could end up as true by Smith, but this likely would have been said about Reggie Bush. Though very different players, that's what happens with high pick Heisman winners. Perhaps overcredited.
Except that Reggie Bush's time came and went and I don't recall anybody saying anything like that about him... with Ladanian Tomlinson, Shaun Alexander, Larry Johnson all a top the game.

Wasn't there a pretty big question mark on Reggie? Despite his supporters saying he was the ultimate weapon, others thought he would only be a dynamic change of pace back and not an every down back, therefore there was no way he would be considered an immediate Top 3 RB in the league. That's what I remember. *shrugs*

This debate about Ingram is certainly interesting. He's can be seen as both overrated and underrated. I guess we could all talk until we're blue in the face about it because it won't be proven until he's in the NFL. But it's still fun to talk about. For me, he has mostly everything you look for in projecting a successful NFL back. I don't know his timed speed, but that would only be icing on the top.

Shane P. Hallam
10-08-2010, 12:00 PM
Except that Reggie Bush's time came and went and I don't recall anybody saying anything like that about him... with Ladanian Tomlinson, Shaun Alexander, Larry Johnson all a top the game.

Wasn't there a pretty big question mark on Reggie? Despite his supporters saying he was the ultimate weapon, others thought he would only be a dynamic change of pace back and not an every down back, therefore there was no way he would be considered an immediate Top 3 RB in the league. That's what I remember. *shrugs*

This debate about Ingram is certainly interesting. He's can be seen as both overrated and underrated. I guess we could all talk until we're blue in the face about it because it won't be proven until he's in the NFL. But it's still fun to talk about. For me, he has mostly everything you look for in projecting a successful NFL back. I don't know his timed speed, but that would only be icing on the top.

Same for Ingram. I mean, plenty don't like him, plenty do. Same with Reggie and these comments were def. made about him.

nepg
10-08-2010, 12:01 PM
I've got a bad feeling about Ingram. I can't really explain why, but I think he's going to be a slightly below average back in the NFL.

That's how I felt last year, but he looks like Ladainian Tomlinson this year rather than the Emmitt Smith he looked like last year. He runs with more power and patience. I really like Ingram this year.

And with New England... They don't have a pounder like they had with Smith or Dillon. That's why they brought in Fred Taylor...but that dude is always hurt.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 12:13 PM
Same for Ingram. I mean, plenty don't like him, plenty do. Same with Reggie and these comments were def. made about him.
You really remember people calling Reggie a Top 3 NFL RB while he was a junior at USC?

ElectricEye
10-08-2010, 12:28 PM
You really remember people calling Reggie a Top 3 NFL RB while he was a junior at USC?

I remember people saying he's going to rush for 2000 yards his rookie year. Not very knowledgeable people mind you, but those ideas came from people saying he's going to be one of the best backs in the NFL the second he steps on the field.

metafour
10-08-2010, 12:33 PM
You really remember people calling Reggie a Top 3 NFL RB while he was a junior at USC?

Are you serious? People though he was one of the best RB prospects of all time, which pretty much signifies the same thing.

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 12:38 PM
I agree people had high expectations about him, saying he could be the best thing since sliced bread. But those were future projections... that's not the same thing. Significant difference. One is, "he will be that good", the other is "he's that good now".

Plus... Nobody in the media was saying Bush would be a Top 3 RB if he were in the NFL right now (as a junior). ...and that is what is happening here with Ingram.

If the point is that people overrate Heisman candidates, then that's fair. But I don't like the Reggie Bush comparison, because it's not the same.

703SKINS202
10-08-2010, 12:40 PM
Are you serious? People though he was one of the best RB prospects of all time, which pretty much signifies the same thing.
People who know nothing about how players transalte from college to the NFL were saying that. Reggie Bush was the greatest RB I've ever seen in space in college. With the overall size and speed of defenders in the NFL, you have to be able to pound it between the tackles. I don't fault the Saints for taking him because if they didn't there would have been a tremendous **** storm. Anyone who thought he would be a top 3 back though was crazy.

As for Ingram, I think if anything he is being underrated in draft circles. I feel like all anyone cares about nowadays is speed. While that can really help and elevate a players draft stock, there just really aren't that many CJ's or AP's out there. Ingram is as solid of an overall RB prospect that there is, especially with a relatively thin class. I hope he falls out of the top 10 and makes everyone pay.

ElectricEye
10-08-2010, 12:41 PM
I agree people had high expectations about him, saying he could be the best thing since sliced bread. But those were future projections... that's not the same thing. Significant difference. One is, "he will be that good", the other is "he's that good now".

Plus... Nobody in the media was saying Bush would be a Top 3 RB if he were in the NFL right now (as a junior). ...and that is what is happening here with Ingram.

If the point is that people overrate Heisman candidates, then that's fair. But I don't like the Reggie Bush comparison, because it's not the same.

I agree with your point, but yeah, people thought Reggie was going to be that good right away. It was all over the place. The expectation level was crazy.

Shane P. Hallam
10-08-2010, 01:21 PM
I agree people had high expectations about him, saying he could be the best thing since sliced bread. But those were future projections... that's not the same thing. Significant difference. One is, "he will be that good", the other is "he's that good now".

Plus... Nobody in the media was saying Bush would be a Top 3 RB if he were in the NFL right now (as a junior). ...and that is what is happening here with Ingram.

If the point is that people overrate Heisman candidates, then that's fair. But I don't like the Reggie Bush comparison, because it's not the same.

Someone in the media said that about Bush. Someone in the media said it about Ingram. It's not much different?

D-Unit
10-08-2010, 01:51 PM
Someone in the media said that about Bush. Someone in the media said it about Ingram. It's not much different?
Can't say that I've following every single media verbage said about Bush at the time, but I don't remember it. If you did. Cool. Carry on.

Vox Populi
10-08-2010, 06:14 PM
People really need to quit talking about Adrian Peterson and anyone else as a "once in a lifetime/era/generation/decade" prospect. They pop up like every other year. The only person you could probably say that about in the past decade was Vick.

ElectricEye
10-08-2010, 06:16 PM
People really need to quit talking about Adrian Peterson and anyone else as a "once in a lifetime/era/generation/decade" prospect. They pop up like every other year. The only person you could probably say that about in the past decade was Vick.

Name a runningback as talented as Peterson in the past decade not named Reggie Bush.

Vox Populi
10-08-2010, 06:26 PM
Name a runningback as talented as Peterson in the past decade not named Reggie Bush.

Well thank you for proving my point by mentioning a second running back...

Tomlinson and McFadden can easily be argued and then you might as well just thrown in the three that went top 5 in '05. Peterson was a bad ass prospect, he wasn't unquestionably the greatest running back prospect of the decade though. He had great tools, but had injury concerns and ran wayyyyy high which together were a pretty big issue at the time when he was coming out. Yeah, you can say he was a top 3 prospect with Joe Thomas and Calvin Johnson that year, but people even had Marshawn Lynch rated higher than him that year. If he was a bust, or just not a top 5 back, not as many people would be calling him this "godlike running back coming out of college that no one could even compare to as a prospect." Yes, I am exaggerating.

BigBanger
10-08-2010, 06:54 PM
Well thank you for proving my point by mentioning a second running back...

Tomlinson and McFadden can easily be argued and then you might as well just thrown in the three that went top 5 in '05. Peterson was a bad ass prospect, he wasn't unquestionably the greatest running back prospect of the decade though. He had great tools, but had injury concerns and ran wayyyyy high which together were a pretty big issue at the time when he was coming out. Yeah, you can say he was a top 3 prospect with Joe Thomas and Calvin Johnson that year, but people even had Marshawn Lynch rated higher than him that year. If he was a bust, or just not a top 5 back, not as many people would be calling him this "godlike running back coming out of college that no one could even compare to as a prospect." Yes, I am exaggerating.
If anyone had Marshawn Lynch rated higher or even remotely close to AD that year was a ******* moron that knew nothing about football. That is quite possibly the most ******** thing I have ever heard.

McFadden had no patience and no vision. He wasn't a natural runner. Fumbling concerns were there right along with injury concerns. He also had a disproportionate body frame (many referred to them as chicken legs) and he ran with inconsistent power, and, often times, would go down (immediately) on first contact. Many argued that he wasn't even the top back in his draft class (and in some games, Felix Jones outplayed him). No one did that with AD. The top 3 were set in stone at the start of the year for the 07 class. Some may have liked Joe Thomas more than Calvin or AD and most said Calvin was tops, but it was pretty much those 3, and then everyone else. Whoever had Lynch ahead of AD is not a credible person. Simple as that. Lynch was also seen as a reach on draft day. Peterson was a steal.

I don't think AD is some be-all-and-end-all prospect. I have said, like in 2007, that he was the best RB prospect I have seen (and he passed up some guys that I was very high on). But I would also put Reggie Bush, Cedric Benson, Larry Johnson, Rashard Mendenhall and Steven Jackson in the same tier as AD (Obviously, if you look at those body types/frames.. you can see who doesn't really fit into the kind of back I like). Was AD the best? Yeah, because he was over 6 foot and over 210 pounds, ran a 4.3 and could break someone ankle's in the open field. DMC wasn't doing anything in college other than running in straight lines.

AD had one glaring question mark.... durability... his running style led to more durability concerns, but he also ran low when contact was approaching (which he still does). It was blindside hits when he was upright that were going to be a concern. He had a fluke shoulder injury. DMC had nagging injuries from game-to-game.

Reggie Bush's expectations were unlike any prospect I have ever seen. Bush has been the greatest college player I have ever seen. He had glaring concerns running between the tackles, but I would forget about that when I watched him torch Fresno State for about 600 total yards. His highlight reel type plays were so special and so extraordinary that these huge concerns that I usually emphasize with a running back (patience, vision, toughness between the tackles -- Mark Ingram) were put on the back burner. Reggie Bush was the exception. And then he hit the NFL... and... he wasn't the exception. All those concerns were there and when people brought them up they just ended up getting overlooked for his incredible ability to dominate in space and do everything on the field. He was a weapon and unlike any RB of his time.

ElectricEye
10-08-2010, 07:59 PM
Well thank you for proving my point by mentioning a second running back...

Tomlinson and McFadden can easily be argued and then you might as well just thrown in the three that went top 5 in '05. Peterson was a bad ass prospect, he wasn't unquestionably the greatest running back prospect of the decade though. He had great tools, but had injury concerns and ran wayyyyy high which together were a pretty big issue at the time when he was coming out. Yeah, you can say he was a top 3 prospect with Joe Thomas and Calvin Johnson that year, but people even had Marshawn Lynch rated higher than him that year. If he was a bust, or just not a top 5 back, not as many people would be calling him this "godlike running back coming out of college that no one could even compare to as a prospect." Yes, I am exaggerating.

The Marshawn Lynch thing was ********, and no serious scouts had him rated above AD. That's probably the best example of internet forum hype I've ever seen. Lynch wasn't in the same class in terms of speed, strength or vision. Plus, the only reason some people thought Lynch would be better was because of the injury concerns for AD. Not many thought he was the more talented of the pair.

Tomlinson played for TCU and had proved very little. Nice prospect, but he could have easily been DeAngelo Williams. Not exactly a bad thing, but there were concerns about the level of competition as well as, believe it or not, his pass catching ability. He wasn't thought of as being a complete back and was a tad on the raw side. Obviously, he dispelled those concerns, but at the time they were considerations.

McFadden was another guy in Marshawn Lynch territory. Talented back, but the concerns were out there about his legs going dead on contact. There was also the entire gimmick offense thing as well. We saw that a bit with Ben Tate last year, despite the triangle numbers and the production.

The only one you can really name is Reggie Bush, but neither of them exactly grow on trees.

dannyz
10-08-2010, 08:57 PM
To say Ingram is top 3 now is crazy but I would call him top 10- 15 right now.

FUNBUNCHER
10-08-2010, 11:16 PM
Not to jack this thread, but Reggie Bush and CJ are virtually the same size; there's something else lacking in Reggie's game that is about more than just his size.

One thing about CJ, even with his sub 4.3 speed, is that he allows his blocking to set up before he makes his read and explodes upfield.
Is CJ more powerful than Bush?? Probably.
Someone else will have to compare/contrast the two, but as a traditional RB, there's a huge gaping hole in Bush's game. Actually, I think Reggie Bush has improved as a runner from his rookie year, but there's no way Sean Payton is going to run Bush from behind the LOS 250+ times in a season after witnessing his issues with durability.

It's always a risk drafting a smallish back who never took big hits in college. CJ took hits at ECU. So did Charles at Texas. Both smallish backs, but still somewhat durable.

descendency
10-09-2010, 12:38 AM
Reggie Bush was the greatest RB I've ever seen in space in college.

It's understandable how people might have thought that too. They had 5 future NFL lineman blocking for them and Matt Leinart was a great college QB. Bush had all of the space he needed to be electric.

He actually reminds me somewhat of an ex-bama player, Shaun Alexander, just with more athleticism.

Exactly. I said this during the pre-season when I stumbled across some old Alabama game footage with Alexander in it. It looked identical to Ingram running the ball.