Home
THIS SITE
  About Phins.com
  Contact Us
TEAM NEWS
  Team Info
  Twitter Feeds
  News Wire
  Phins RSS Feed
GAMES
  Schedule
PERSONNEL
  Roster
  Depth Chart
FOR THE FANS
  Forums
  Places To Watch
HISTORY
  Team History
  1972 Tribute
 
-- Advertisement --
Privacy Policy at Phins.com
 
  Phins.com Phorums
    News Wire | Roster | Depth Chart | Last/Next Game | Schedule | Links  
          Mark Ingram
Miami Dolphins Civilized Discussion :  Phins.com Phorums The fastest message board... ever.
This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel
Pages: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3
Mark Ingram
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: March 15, 2011 05:39PM

I really think this guy will be the pick if we don't trade down. Fits a need + biggest name/immediate impact offensive player available at our spot, and I don't think we can discount how much Ross wants an offensive "face of the franchise" and Sporano and Ireland need immediate production out of the #1 pick.

I keep hearing the emmitt smith comparisons. If we could have an emmitt smith in the backfield, I'd take that over an OL or another D player. Perfect world, we drop down 3-4 spots, pick up another 3d and still get him. Then maybe package our 2 3ds for a 2d and 5th?

We've rehashed this I know, but there is nothing to talk about if you don't want to argue the labor/union issue!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 15, 2011 06:24PM

I think you may be right , only becuase Ireland and Saprano cannot survive another Missed Draft Pick. if they pick Cam Newton and he dives they are Done. Stick a fork in them.

I'm hearing great things about Colin Kaepernick if we can score a second rounder............

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Phinsfan2 ()
Date: March 15, 2011 07:27PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 16, 2011 02:44AM

I hear ya , and Hope you are right. But would you rather go back to Mr Ross and say, Hey I got ya a decent back.....he went 1200 Yds! We didn't make the playoffs but 1200 yds!We will get them next year!

Or......Cam Newton can't make reads and henne is still our #1. Sorry we didn't make the playoffs. We will get them next year!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Aqua&Orange ()
Date: March 16, 2011 04:16AM

I will not be happy. I will actually be pretty bummed if we pick him.

No need to draft a RB in the first round....WHY CANT PEOPLE GET THIS THROUGH THEIR HEADS!?!?!

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 05:10AM

Wow I agree 100 percent with Aqua, and Phinsfan on this one.

Why would you want a slow RB at 15? He isnt even fast, elusive? Sure but I want a Chris Johnson, and I will never ever take a RB in the first round, unless his speed is like 4.2 or less.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Phinsfan2 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 06:01AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 06:37AM

Ireland is only concerned about next year. A repeat of last year (no playoffs) and he and Sporano are gone. So he is much more likely to pick someone in the first who can step in immediately and play. That makes someone like Ingram, or to a lesser extent a WR or OL the guy. Factor in Ross's desire to have a "marquee" guy on the team, it makes Ingram the most likely pick. If they take a Mallet in the first, he won't play next year and our O will be most likely the same as 2010---if so see ya Ireland and Sporano. And that QB won't be the next regiem's "guy" so could be a wasted pick if they want someone else in there. The only QB Ross may have patience with is Newton b/c of his status and upside--but he won't be there at 15.

Not saying Ingram should be the guy at 15, just that it makes sense based on the FO situtation and our team needs.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: DaytonaDolfan13 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 10:13AM

INGRAM could outrun any of our current backs. He's a solid RB, no issues, a good receiver, no BS. He appears to be a TEAM-PLAYER and the type of kid that would get to work right away (if he wasnt locked out).

He significantly better than ALL of the 3rd round RB options.

I would NOT BE DIS-APPOINTED AT ALL if he were selected if the following players are off the board...GABBERT, NEWTON, WATT

BUT !!! I would be very tempted to reach for T NATE SOLDER or C/G MIKE POUNCEY

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 16, 2011 10:17AM

Hear! Hear! to Daytona. Also spot on on Solder and Pouncey. I repeat for the 1,000th time. You pick the best player available at a position of need in the first round.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 16, 2011 11:21AM

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hear! Hear! to Daytona. Also spot on on Solder
> and Pouncey. I repeat for the 1,000th time. You
> pick the best player available at a position of
> need in the first round.


That sounds like great GM fodder/talk. But how has that worked for us the last 10+ years? (AHEM) Ronnie Brown, Jake Long ............. Very solid + players. Did we make a Playoff game? YOU NEED A SIGNAL CALLER. Why is that so hard to understand? But thats easy for us to say becuase its Irelands job on the line. He will pick the SAFEST pick becuase 1 more Pat White and he's getting a Token and dropped off on I95 North.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Phinsfan2 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 11:50AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: March 16, 2011 02:20PM

DaytonaDolfan13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> INGRAM could outrun any of our current backs.
> He's a solid RB, no issues, a good receiver, no
> BS. He appears to be a TEAM-PLAYER and the type
> of kid that would get to work right away (if he
> wasnt locked out).
>
> He significantly better than ALL of the 3rd round
> RB options.
>
> I would NOT BE DIS-APPOINTED AT ALL if he were
> selected if the following players are off the
> board...GABBERT, NEWTON, WATT
>
> BUT !!! I would be very tempted to reach for T
> NATE SOLDER or C/G MIKE POUNCEY


I bet you 10000 dollars that Williams, and Sheetz could beat Ingram in a race.

Hell Cobbs might be able to take him.

Man Im glad your not the GM. WOW!! Puncy? Really you would take Pouncy in the first lol no MAYBE second, I would take Pouncy in the third.

Also you like Newton. Geesh what thought process goes on in that mind, when you think of these players??????

Is it the hype? The fact that national tv only really talks about the guy's you mentioned?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 02:22PM by Mia1.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 16, 2011 02:25PM

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That sounds like great GM fodder/talk. But how
> has that worked for us the last 10+ years? (AHEM)
> Ronnie Brown, Jake Long ............. Very solid
> + players. Did we make a Playoff game? YOU NEED A
> SIGNAL CALLER. Why is that so hard to understand?

RESPONSE: The logic of your own argument can easily be turned against your conclusion. Some on this board (not me, but some) would say, "(AHEM) Chad Henne. How has THAT WORKED FOR US?????? Did we make a playoff game?"

The draft is always a crap shoot, the only thing you can do is try to upgrade positions but "signal caller" is not any more immune from making the wrong pick or picking someone who ultimately fails than any other position.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Andy B. ()
Date: March 16, 2011 03:25PM

I can completely understand taking Ingram. The problem I see is that we don't have a back worth a darn. We do need a QB, but unfortunately there aren't any worth the pick in rd 1. The only other option is trading down, but unless you have a trading partner, then your screwed there too. If we go with the BPA, then I think Ingram. Of course I'm not a GM, nor will I ever be one. Shoot, I thought Leaf was going to be better than Manninggrinning smiley

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 16, 2011 04:18PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 16, 2011 04:54PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Aqua&Orange ()
Date: March 16, 2011 05:18PM

Ingram is a top 20 to a mid 20 on the big board of most experts.

With that being said, he will not be the best player on the board when we pick at #15, GAURANTEED.


Now, if we picked at #23, then maybe he would be the best player available. But not at #15. No.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 16, 2011 05:40PM

No, A & O, I'm not saying he will be the best player (overall) on the board when we pick. I am just saying that he will be projected as the best RB when we pick. Agree or not, I think RB is a position of need because I don't like our back ups.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2011 05:41PM by ChyrenB.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Aqua&Orange ()
Date: March 16, 2011 05:56PM

But RB is not the biggest need and he will not the best player available. Either way you look at it, he shouldnt be the pick.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 16, 2011 06:58PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 17, 2011 02:16AM

Chyrene says:

I agree that RB is not the BIGGEST need but as I said, I believe that we should, in the first round, take the BEST PLAYER IN A position of need.

____________________________________________________________________

Real Real response: So what is a greater need? offensive line or Quarterback? The Dolphins are cheap. A Number one Lineman in the draft will want millions less then a # 1 QB. I understood what the conversation was about , what I disagree with is your very bad attempts to prove your point. QB has been a posistion of need since Marino retired. Yet the Dolphins have wasted #1 draft picks on Rickey Williams , Ted Ginn, Ronnie Brown, Veron cary, John Avery, all kinds of skill posistions. Where has it gotten us? You keep picking up peoples 3rd stringers, and looking for 2nd round bargains , you get what you pay for.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: March 17, 2011 04:53AM

I don't think $$ factors into it at #15. Any player picked there, regardless of position, will get about the same $. Back when we picked Long at #1, I think $$ factored into it, since Long was willing to sign for less $$ than Ryan.

The bigger factor is getting someone who will produce right away for Ireland and Fist Pump to save their jobs. That's why I think if we stay at 15 the pick is more likely to be a RB (or OL or WR) than anything else.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Mia1 ()
Date: March 17, 2011 05:00AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Date: March 17, 2011 06:43AM

Lets say that Ingram is the best Running back to be drafted this decade. Lets say he runs for 1800 yds. Ricky did it for us and we still didn't do squat. WE NEED A QUALITY QB!! Thats it! Bottomline. We have tried everything else . The Pat Whites and the Chad hennes slip to the 2nd round for a reason. Does being a 1 st rounder mean you will be great? of course not. But it shows alot of people saw more positives then negatives. A QB the dolphins have no buisness picking anything but with thier first pick, unless they trade down a grab Colin Kapernick later on. Nothing else is acceptable.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 17, 2011 08:23AM

TreasureCoast. You are just new on this board. We have had the "How good is Chad Henne, should we get rid of him" discussion on this board ad nauseum DURING THE REGULAR SEASON AND SHORTLY AFTERWARDS. Maybe, you want to discuss this but the rest of us (except Mia1 who is never tired of arguing) don't want to.

There are two camps, one says that we have to draft a QB. We get it that you're in that camp but you're a little too late. We don't argue with each other about that anymore. We know that people like PhinsFans2 take that position. Others believe that we should grab Off. Line first, still others believe that we need a speed receiver first, and a few like me believe we have to replace Ricky and Ronnie. But we've finished those fights.


You talk about the Chad Hennes and the Pat Whites but What we are doing NOW ON THIS BOARD is start from the other person's premise (that we need a QB first or an RB first) and then judge, even given the person's premise, what sense does a particular pick make.

That's why we have the Ryan Mallett y/n, Mark Ingram y/n, etc. threads. What you are supposed to do is evaluate the player, not whether we should pick one from that position. So the question is that if we go that way, what kind of guy is this, not whether we should go that way. That last fight is old and tired.

So please, if you want to fight the "we need a quarterback first" go back to one of the old threads and read up on it. Maybe resurrect one of those threads and put in your input so it will be printed now. But we're all tired of fighting it. It's over, dude. Nobody's going to convince anyone else on which position we need to draft first.

Even I myself really think Off. line is the biggest need but I think we can get well at that position in later rounds. Usually each draft only produces One or Two Elite running backs but produces far more good offensive linemen. So that's why I say again and again

YOU TAKE THE BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE AT (ONE OF YOUR) POSITIONS OF NEED WHEN YOU PICK IN THE FIRST ROUND.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2011 08:31AM by ChyrenB.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: montequi ()
Date: March 17, 2011 08:33AM

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> YOU TAKE THE BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE AT (ONE OF
> YOUR) POSITIONS OF NEED WHEN YOU PICK IN THE FIRST
> ROUND.

I DO agree with THIS. We've been talking far too long about choosing the BPA and NOT picking for need. The reality is, unless you played in the Superbowl, you're very likely picking for need.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: berkeley223 ()
Date: March 17, 2011 10:08AM

I don't think anyone is saying to take Ingram over a QB if a good one is available. But the concensus top 2 (newton and gabbert) won't be there at 15 and are not even considered close to sure things. The second tier of QBs are considered a reach (not worthy of the pick) at 15---locker, mallet, and the next batch are not even considered 1st rounders (kapernick, ponder). In the face of this reality I don't think you can say we've got to pick a QB at 15 this year just b/c we need one. No one likely to be there is worthy of the pick

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: Phinsfan2 ()
Date: March 17, 2011 10:52AM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Mark Ingram
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: March 17, 2011 12:38PM

Well, you can't get EVERYBODY to agree with you.

Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
   
Home Curt Fennell
Contact Us
DOLFAN in New England
TOP
   
© Phins.com. No portion of this site may be reproduced without
the express permission of the author, Curt Fennell. All rights reserved.