Mark Ingram at #10?

[MTK]

While Mike Shanahan has a reputation for finding unheralded running backs, I have a hunch that he’ll have a hard time passing on Alabama’s Mark Ingram with the No. 10 pick if Ingram is available. The Redskins don’t have third- and fourth-round picks, and I could envision a first-round scenario in which that leads them to Ingram.

Quick-hit thoughts around NFL & Pats - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Thoughts on this possibility?

The guy is a stud and we definitely need another RB, but at #10 I think we have other more pressing needs.

[SmootSmack]

Can't see it happening. Doesn't fit Shanahan's pattern with RBs anyway. I think they're going D (still think Robert Quinn) if they stay at #10

[skinster]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Can't see it happening. Doesn't fit Shanahan's pattern with RBs anyway. I think they're going D (still think Robert Quinn) if they stay at #10

I agree that it doesn't fit his patterns with RB's. I do not think we will draft a RB in the 1st at all. But I do think Shanny is capable of doing it. Supposedly if Cutler wasn't available he was going to draft Maroney.

[SBXVII]

I'm in no way saying our RB's we have now are studs especially after one year, but I personally think the RB's we have now can get the job done and be beasts if given the chance. However it all starts up front. The teams OL didn't block well. Mybe because it was the first year in a zone blocking scheme or the team just doesn't have the players right now for a zone blocking scheme but the blocking could have been better for both the run and the passing.

I'd rather see the team drop out of the 10th pick to aquire more picks. I've started picking up all the "Draft" magazines and honestly I don't like any one of their ideas 100% but each one brings about some good ideas.

For whatever reason when I hear "we need a RB" or "I hope they take (whoever) at RB" I cringe. I think we can survive with what we have,and pick up: QB, NT, OL, WR, LB/DE, CB. I forget how many picks we have. Hopefully they bring in a ton of UDFA's.

[Eknox]

we have to go Paea or Phil Taylor this is a big need to plug the defensive middle.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Eknox

we have to go Paea or Phil Taylor this is a big need to plug the defensive middle.

At #10?

[Eknox]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

At #10?

If we don't get a capable tackle, our defense will be swiss cheese again. I say do like Jacksonville did last year, get the guy that will help your team the most and get the most out of the 1st pick. Just curious, do you like the Ingram pick better? If were going to reach at 10 take the tackle.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Eknox

If we don't get a capable tackle, our defense will be swiss cheese again. I say do like Jacksonville did last year, get the guy that will help your team the most and get the most out of the 1st pick. Just curious, do you like the Ingram pick better? If were going to reach at 10 take the tackle.

I just don't like Taylor at #10. Not when we have other needs and there will be better players on the board there. Along with a NT we need another pass rusher to really make the 3-4 work. I'd rather take a LB/DE at #10.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Eknox

If we don't get a capable tackle, our defense will be swiss cheese again. I say do like Jacksonville did last year, get the guy that will help your team the most and get the most out of the 1st pick. Just curious, do you like the Ingram pick better? If were going to reach at 10 take the tackle.

Don't reach at #10. We have enough other holes to fill we can get someone who is a good pick at #10. Reaching is the worst thing we could possibly do.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Eknox

If we don't get a capable tackle, our defense will be swiss cheese again. I say do like Jacksonville did last year, get the guy that will help your team the most and get the most out of the 1st pick. Just curious, do you like the Ingram pick better? If were going to reach at 10 take the tackle.

I agree about the NT need. The thing is, if we played our cards right we might be able to get a player at #10 AND still get Taylor or Paea.

As to the question of the thread, I would love to have Ingram. But at #10 I'd rather feed the front.

[NC_Skins]

Even if you did pick him with the #10 spot, who the hell would open the running lanes up in between the tackles? A RB at the #10 spot is a horrible choice for a team with so many needs. Our DL needs some serious upgrades.

[celts32]

I have heard Ingram compared to Emmit Smith...although Smith was obviously a great player if i am going to spend the #10 pick on a RB Smith is not the comparison I want that RB to have. Basically I would want a homerun threat in the Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson mold for that high of a pick.

I agree the pick is probably defense but i would also spend it on a QB if there was one on the board with a high enough Shanny grade on him.

[SkinzWin]

THat would be the worst move ever for us. Paea or Taylor at 10 would be just as bad. There is no chance any of those three go at #10. Mods are free to go ahead and lock this thread, lol.... all done here.

[Eknox]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

THat would be the worst move ever for us. Paea or Taylor at 10 would be just as bad. There is no chance any of those three go at #10. Mods are free to go ahead and lock this thread, lol.... all done here.

Oh yeah Von Miller will be there at 10....NOT!

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

THat would be the worst move ever for us. Paea or Taylor at 10 would be just as bad. There is no chance any of those three go at #10. Mods are free to go ahead and lock this thread, lol.... all done here.

Considering that the owner/admin started the thread...