(YouTube) Mark Ingram's preseason (4 Viewers)

[Darkhorse985]

LOL!

Glad someone realized I was joking.

 

[Unobsolete]

Ingram looks like a complete back. Big baller shot caller first stringer

 

[reggiekush]

Ingram needs to watch more film on PT.

 

[saints4life25]

Ingram needs to watch more film on PT.

Would you care to expand on what you feel he did wrong this preseason?

 

[Unobsolete]

Ingram needs to watch more film on PT.

I think they're busy watching Falcons tape. You know, the ACTUAL adversaries. Unlike you, these guys support one another as a team.

Another reason we tune you out and listen to Coach

 

[Gumbo's Dad]

For me, the negative plays didn't bother me. On one, he get's blown up in the backfield, what could he do. And the leaping play didn't bother me that bad because he typically doesn't have a fumbling issue.

What did bother me was his inability to maximize gains on plays that were well blocked because he didn't follow his lead blocker or recognize cutback lanes. It's like he's running into contact to prove he's physical or something. PT gets double the yardage on those plays easily because he makes quicker cuts, follows his blocks and makes people miss.

I don't think Ingram is a bad back, he just doesn't play to his draft position and that isn't his fault. He didn't asked to be traded up for.

I mostly agree with this. He is an ok back when used correctly. He needs to be in space. He is just not a guy who will move a pile like Deuce did. He just has not played to his draft position.

 

[NOLAnuffsaid]

he drives me NUTS when he stutter steps before he hits the hole!!!

 

[Unobsolete]

he drives me NUTS when he stutter steps before he hits the hole!!!

Notice that too, but at this point in his development that has to fall on his coaching.

 

[renegadewa]

If he can average 4.6 a carry I think that silences quite a few Ingram detractors!!

 

[Saintgadi]

He is looking much better. Needs to work on his vision.

The play at 1:00 where the fullback blasts a giant hole for him and he runs into the back of the tackle is almost laughable.

But he is having much less of those at least.

Also, on one of the screen passes vs. Texans, he had an oppty to cut it to the outside and take it up the sideline instead of going inside and getting tackled.

In general, he looks good but not great. Remember that he cost us a 1st AND a 2nd rounder. Still doesnt seem worth it when you consider all the RBs we find undrafted.

Not hating on MI. Just saying that trading up to get him was clearly a bad decision.

 

[#23screenmachine]

Ingram needs to watch more film on PT.

Idk why people are hating on you for that statement because that's exactly what he needs to do. His vision is just not there right now. Watching those highlights showed me that while he does make some good runs, he makes just as many where he completely misses the hole or takes way too long to get there because of his stutter-stepping. He needs to learn how to see the hole and just GO, not hesitate.

And I hate how people on here think that if someone criticizes Mark Ingram that automatically means we want him to fail. I want him to succeed because that would help our team. I don't think he will be a very good RB because he doesn't have good vision but that doesn't mean I want him to fail just so I can say I was right.

 

[St.Gonzo]

When there is a hole Mark will hit it. If a cutback lane is open he never sees it.

 

[Unobsolete]

Originally Posted by SaintBoof
He is looking much better. Needs to work on his vision.

The play at 1:00 where the fullback blasts a giant hole for him and he runs into the back of the tackle is almost laughable.

But he is having much less of those at least.

SaintsBoof spit I'm glad you brought up the run at the 1:00 mark, even though I disagree totally with your explanation. If you all give me the BOTD to post my conclusive dissection of this play, I think even some of the guys known for being skeptical of Ingram's abilities may see this play in another light.

I'll break this run down second by second. Starting at exactly the 1:00 minute mark.

1:00 - Brees hikes ball out of I-formation at 42 Yard line (FB-Collins RB-Ingram). Designed off-tackle run aimed at Raider's DE Mike Crawford #91.

1:01 - LT Brown #71 instantly pushed back 2 yards behind point of attack and the rest of the Saints line as Ingram takes handoff. Looking for the block ahead of Ingram is Jed Collins, running off Brown's right shoulder. Now LOOK CLOSELY.

This is the meat of my argument. SaintBoof, I quoted you as you stated that Collins "blasts a huge hole for Ingram". However, at this 1:01 mark you can see that as Collins passes the 91/71 block, 91 has his eyes clear on Jed + Ingram. Obviously, Crawford does not take on Jed as he wants Ingram, and Jed's block is not designed to engage him anyway. If Jed had the football, he would have been stopped for a 2 yard loss, the tape shows how easily Crawford could have just stuck his arm out.

1:02 - 1:05 - Now here is where I want you skeptics to tell me exactly else Ingram could have done to please you. In this three second span I'm going to point out 5 moves that Ingram puts on Crawford that you guys label as "Ingram running into the OL's back.


1) Ingram approaches Brown/Crawford and sees Brown getting little push. He knows he must make Crawford miss on either side.

His initial move: Plant on right foot/ Juke inside.

2) Here is where I'll make it easy to see how Ingram and Brown interacted. All you have to do is watch Brown's left foot. It is losing ground throughout the play; you can see that after Ingram's initial juke right, Crawford tries to disengage Brown by pushing him outside, coincidentally at the exact time Ingram is in his 2nd juke.

2nd move: Juke outside, get's tripped by LT Brown's left leg.

3) Ingram's second juke outside was correct as Crawford had disengaged to the inside. However with having lost his balance, Ingram's chance to go outside is lost. *** Also note that #31 Tracy Porter is setting the edge vs. Nick Toon. Porter also disengages effectively forcing Ingram to turn upfield.

3rd move: Off balance. Lower COG and visibility, fake inside.

4 & 5) At this point, Brown has regained his position on Crawford because of Ingram's fake, and Brown starts pushing him upfield. Ingram having WAITED FOR HIS BLOCK TO DEVELOP then follows it back to the LOS on Browns left shoulder and eventually for a gain of four yards.

Now watch that play over and pause it at these specific times and occurrences. It will become obvious that the split second decision making of Ingram saved that play from failing off the bat. It also becomes obvious that the decision to knock Ingram off his balance was not his own, but Brown's inability to get push at the point of attack.

Seriously, this was time consuming and you may have to pause the video numerous times (I did dozens). But it's needed when the plays happen so fast, and to make a fair argument against a player you need to make an attempt to understand his play as much as possible.

 

[bobad]

Ingram needs to watch more film on PT.

The film made me think about what Pierre could have done with some of those holes.

 

[meily]

The film made me think about what Pierre could have done with some of those holes.

You guys talk like Pierre is all world...if PT was as good as people on here believe he is we would of never went to the rotating of the backs and he wouldnt consistently take a backseat to Ingram...Ingram is bad in peoples eyes yet the coaches still give him the opportunity ahead of PT.....this is not a knock against PT or an endorsement for Ingram...the bias is just unbearable sometimes.