Mark Ingram at #10?

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

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

LOL... That was my "playful ribbing" line I could have said this thread sounds like it'd be started by Ace...

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

LOL... That was my "playful ribbing" line I could have said this thread sounds like it'd be started by Ace...

I was just tossing it out there to discuss... Not much else going on right now

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I was just tossing it out there to discuss... Not much else going on right now

Duly noted. Anyone think any of these rumors are famous Shanny smoke screens? I hear tell people saying something about Gabbert being taken #2, any credence to that anyone may know of?

[44ever]

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.

Because there are soooo many other things to discuss this off season right now right?

I actually would not object to the idea of taking a stud RB at 10. The way I see it is, if we can score more, then we need less of a dominate defense.

Plus it would add more action to our losses.

[BuckSkin]

Originally Posted by 44ever

Because there are soooo many other things to discuss this off season right now right?

I actually would not object to the idea of taking a stud RB at 10. The way I see it is, if we can score more, then we need less of a dominate defense.

Plus it would add more action to our losses.

Watch it 44ever, you're starting to sound like a Big10 man. Heh, heh-- I knew you would come around. The ole 3 yards and a cloud of dust play.

[44ever]

Originally Posted by BuckSkin

Watch it 44ever, you're starting to sound like a Big10 man. Heh, heh-- I knew you would come around. The ole 3 yards and a cloud of dust play.

LOL, at this point I'm just hoping to see football played. I also am not totally convinced our "needs" are as desperate as they seem. What I think is if our current team sees a spark anywhere the team as a whole will step up. Until now all we have seen is drama, drama, drama.

Big names like DM have let us down, Haynesworth, Portis "injuries" switch to 3-4, another new coach(s) , ect... I say we have great talent on this team. what we need is time to adapt and settle in.

Do we have some holes to fill? yes but not as many as some have suggested. IMO.

A solid QB,WR,RB combo can do amazing things for team. Even ignite a defense.

[Chico23231]

Ingram at 10, no way...needs/best player available for us at ten is not Ingram

[Eknox]

This is my opinion every year they say, this is too high to pick this guy or that guy, only to see guys that played very well and have the skills slide to the good teams at the bottom and produce more than a lot of the top picks. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick remember? So I say if we like a guy **** a draft grade, especially if we are running a 3-4 with no NT.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

My dream draft would be Von Miller at 10 and Dalton in the 2nd.

Imagine Orakpo and Miller on the outside -- sick.

[diehard]

Ingram is good value at 10th still, there's no need for a stud RB without an OL.

[30gut]

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.

Wait, what?

Mike Shanahan has success with mid to late round RBs therefore he'll draft a RB at 10 even though Kyle ,the OC, is a pass first coordinator with a 60/40 pass run ration and a WR will likely be available at 10?

[Dirtbag59]

If anything they've been looking at both 2nd round and 4th round prospects at Running Back. Looking at Ingram seems like nothing more then due diligence if that. I mean he would be nice to have but I wouldn't think we'd be ready for a championship run before we wear him down. Funny thing is if this was the 70's or early 80's Ingram would be a lock to be the number one pick.

[Redskin Jim]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

I would rather try to snag Kendall from OKst in the 2nd or 3rd. I dont think picking a RB at #10 will make the most impact on the field for us. I don't think a QB at 10 will be there that is worth the pick either (I see busts people, EVERYWHERE)... I would hope for a dynamic pass rusher or corner, maybe a WR if Jones or Green was available.

[freddyg12]

Ingram is a great player, I thought of E. Smith too as somebody mentioned earlier. That said, he's a good prospect but not a once in a decade rb. For us to take a rb at 10 he'd have to be special. I see Ingram as a good, potentially great nfl player, but not a great enough prospect for this team to take at 10 given the defensive talent in the draft.

[BuckSkin]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Ingram is a great player, I thought of E. Smith too as somebody mentioned earlier. That said, he's a good prospect but not a once in a decade rb. For us to take a rb at 10 he'd have to be special. I see Ingram as a good, potentially great nfl player, but not a great enough prospect for this team to take at 10 given the defensive talent in the draft.

I think Ingram is a definite talent, and I would enjoy anointing him the heir to Portis. freddyg12 is right though... he is not a once a decade back. There were several experts that even questioned if he was even the best back at Georgia this past season. So.... to answer the original question of this thread, regrettably "no".