Former #Chargers veteran pass-rusher Melvin Ingram is set to visit the #Chiefs this coming week, source said, the first visit for the veteran. After seeing him twice a season, KC could bring in Ingram to face his old team.
Originally Posted by TEX:
It does add up. Houston was milking KC and wasn't playing hard. He had "something to prove" in Indy. Even then, his stats have declined from his first year in Indy to his second year, right? He is also NOWHERE NEAR the player he was before the injury. Right? He is over 30, right? Ingram might play OK after his injury, but I bet it's also the beginning of his decline. Anyway, if KC signs him, one of us will get to say,"I told you so." I hope it's you.
Declined? 11 sacks for a team lead by a garbage qb to 8 sacks in a team that went to the playoffs is hardly bad is it? :-) the fact is he had injury issues and was 30 when he left and then ge turned it all around in Indy. Last season was a one off for Ingram injury and stats wise so that's why it's not impossible for him to have a big year in KC if he signs imo. [Reply]
If we're not going to get one of the tackles we targeted in FA, then we need to get a pass rusher in FA. We can't go into the draft needing to find an edge and a LT. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
That’s awfully premature.
Is it? He sure didn't look like the 2nd coming of Marshall Faulk, much less any of the other backs he's been compared to. The continued case for not using 1st round picks on fucking RBs.
I love a good RB and would take one in round 3, maybe even 2 if he looks special, but you sure as fuck don't waste a 1st on a RB ever. I get that teams do, but I'd consider it an especially stupid move.
I've tried to defend the pick to some extent in the past because of the level the offense was at and what a good RB could have done for the team. It proved to be a bad thought process and I should have stuck to my guns. You just don't get appreciably better production out of a 1st round RB as you do a later-round RB. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Is it? He sure didn't look like the 2nd coming of Marshall Faulk, much less any of the other backs he's been compared to. The continued case for not using 1st round picks on ****ing RBs.
I love a good RB and would take one in round 3, maybe even 2 if he looks special, but you sure as **** don't waste a 1st on a RB ever. I get that teams do, but I'd consider it an especially stupid move.
I've tried to defend the pick to some extent in the past because of the level the offense was at and what a good RB could have done for the team. It proved to be a bad thought process and I should have stuck to my guns. You just don't get appreciably better production out of a 1st round RB as you do a later-round RB.
He was basically a 2nd round RB, its not like he was taken in the top 20. He also had one of the worst run-blocking lines the league and a coach notorious for ignoring the running game. He'll be fine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
Houston disappeared in big games.
Ingram has never played in one.
I was thinking EXACTLY this about Houston earlier today, yeah sure he usually feasted during game X... but when it counted he always pulled a Houdini [Reply]