Melvin Ingram... 264 LBS

[cobra]

Ingram at 14? Hell no.

Bruce Irvin in the 3rd? Yes, please. I seem has only as a situational pass rusher. As impressive as he is as an edge pass rusher, I think a team is going to struggle drafting a 1 down/situational pass rusher higher than the 3rd.

[JonJon]

I doubt Irvin makes it out the second round. Would love to have him though.

[realtick]

Originally Posted by Dough Boy

He's nothing like Maybin. Mabin was a one year starter, and was a pure speed rusher that ran a 4.8 forty. He never played OLB, and was purely a Def End, and not even the fastest or quickest DL that timed, let alone one of the more athletically gifted OLB.

Ingram has played OLB, has a bull rush, inside rush (played DT) and can turn the corner on Right Tackles, not sure he can gain the edge on elite Left Tackles. There are very few similarities to there games.

The Def End from Illinois reminds me a lot of Maybin. Whitney Marcellus (sp). Both are very long, both one Lamar Woodley. Short, stocky, def ends that will


I've watched both Ingram and Maybin (PSU) play. Two different cats.

Maybin had a 10-yard split of 1.57 which is faster than most WRs, and also part of the reason why folks thought he'd be a great pass rusher outside.

[realtick]

4.66 is about what SDogo predicted and while good, is not some freakish athlete time IMO.

His 1.72 split also gives credence to him not being explosive off the edge.

[TheCount]

Perry just ran a 4.5, good god. This kid is a phenomenal athlete.

[Dough Boy]

Originally Posted by realtick

4.66 is about what SDogo predicted and while good, is not some freakish athlete time IMO.

His 1.72 split also gives credence to him not being explosive off the edge.

What did Kerrigan run last year?

[Gaede]

Originally Posted by TheCount

Bruce Irvin ran a 4.5. I'd be all over him if we were looking for a weakside OLB, I love the kid.

Me too.

I can see a meteoric Demarcus Ware-type rise in the draft for Irvin

[jterrell]

South Carolina's Melvin Ingram also looked very fluid in his drills, running a 4.66 40-yard dash after measuring in at just over 6'1" and 264 pounds. Ingram also put up 28 reps of 225 pounds on the bench press while looking very nimble and athletic in the stand-up drills, furthering the belief that he can play in the NFL either with his hand on the ground or standing up.

Lots of good pass rush options and that is a good thing because we need them.

Will be interesting to see is Perry rises up past Ingram. They are probably the 2nd and 3rd ranked pass rushers now.

[Dough Boy]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Lots of good pass rush options and that is a good thing because we need them.

Will be interesting to see is Perry rises up past Ingram. They are probably the 2nd and 3rd ranked pass rushers now.

After watching Ingram play, I knew he would not win the underwear olympics. However, if you just watch the kid play, he is just a good football player. He is not overly explosive (ie Ware), overly quick (Jason Taylor in his prime); but he has exceptional power, sneaky quickness and gets the most out of his talent. He is idealy suited for SOLB at the next level. He has good feet and he will be able to cover TE down the seam and RB in the flat.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Dough Boy

After watching Ingram play, I knew he would not win the underwear olympics. However, if you just watch the kid play, he is just a good football player. He is not overly explosive (ie Ware), overly quick (Jason Taylor in his prime); but he has exceptional power, sneaky quickness and gets the most out of his talent. He is idealy suited for SOLB at the next level. He has good feet and he will be able to cover TE down the seam and RB in the flat.

Aldon Smith was a 4.78 40 guy yet took home rookie honors. It looks like Ingram will end up with eerily similar combine numbers to Lamarr Woodley.

[Dough Boy]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Aldon Smith was a 4.78 40 guy yet took home rookie honors. It looks like Ingram will end up with eerily similar combine numbers to Lamarr Woodley.

Reading the same sheet of music. I think Woodley and Ingram have comparable styles. If you watch both at the combine, then watch both on the field you just get the sense they are football playing people. They are both considered too short and too slow (esp Woodley, he ran a 4.8 forty). Production at the college level is a good indicator. Its not 1 to 1, but as good an indicator as any other.

I like the combine to confirm what I say on tape. Not to replace what was seen on the field. Both Ingram, Woodley, Smith, Kerrigan, etc had good college production. They did not blow up the combine, but Smith, Woodley and Kerrigan college production did translate to NFL production.

[InmanRoshi]

Just not a big fan of Ingram's short and squatty body combined with his short arms, especially if they run a 4.8. Offensive linemen are going to have an easy time getting their hands inside his frame and neutralizing him as a pass rusher trying to turn the corner. I like long angular bodies and freakishly long arms on outside pass rushers. He reminds me of a poor man's Adalius Thomas. I guess he did a lot of things at South Carolina, but is he truly exceptional at any of them? I don't think he was the impact player in college that Woodley was at Michigan.

[cobra]

The guy that Ingram is the most "eerily similar to"?






Anthony Spencer. Can't understand how you people are not seeing that. A little less productive in college than Spencer and a little less physically impressive. But the damn guy is a lesser, unproven image of Anthony Spencer, who you want to replace with Ingram. I don't get it.

Anthony Spencer at the Combine
Height: 6027
Weight: 261
Arms: 32.5
40 yd: 4.7
10 yd: 1.64
Bench: 30 reps
Vert: 32.5"
Broad: 9'04"
20yd Shuttle: 4.43
3 cone: 7.14

Melvin Ingram at the Combine
Height: 6011 [inch and half shorter]
Weight: 264 [3 lbs heavier]
Arms: 31.5 [shorter arms]
40 yd: 4.79 [.09 secs slower]
10 yard: 1.72 [slower burst]
Bench: 28 reps [2 less reps]
Vert: 34.5" [2 inches higher]
Broad: 9'1" [3 inches shorter]
20yd Shuttle: ???
3 cone: ???

They are very close, but Spencer has slightly preferable results in everything, with the exception of the vertical jump. Spencer was faster overall, faster out of the blocks, stronger, and preferable size. We'll see how Ingram does on the shuttles and cones. Oh yeah, Spencer was a starter for his team in college, and he was more productive statistically but they are comparable.

It really is the closest comparison for Ingram, and yet Ingram comes up short compared to Spencer (no pun). However, some of you are willing to take the risk that Ingram will somehow be better than Spencer in the NFL at a position he has never played before?

I don't get it. It's irrational.

[Dough Boy]

Originally Posted by cobra

The guy that Ingram is the most "eerily similar to"?






Anthony Spencer. Can't understand how you people are not seeing that. A little less productive in college than Spencer and a little less physically impressive. But the damn guy is a lesser, unproven image of Anthony Spencer, who you want to replace with Ingram. I don't get it.

Anthony Spencer at the Combine
Height: 6027
Weight: 261
Arms: 32.5
40 yd: 4.7
10 yd: 1.64
Bench: 30 reps
Vert: 32.5"
Broad: 9'04"
20yd Shuttle: 4.43
3 cone: 7.14

Melvin Ingram at the Combine
Height: 6011 [inch and half shorter]
Weight: 264 [3 lbs heavier]
Arms: 31.5 [shorter arms]
40 yd: 4.79 [.09 secs slower]
10 yard: 1.72 [slower burst]
Bench: 28 reps [2 less reps]
Vert: 34.5" [2 inches higher]
[View Full Quote]Broad: 9'1" [3 inches shorter]
20yd Shuttle: ???
3 cone: ???

They are very close, but Spencer has slightly preferable results in everything, with the exception of the vertical jump. Spencer was faster overall, faster out of the blocks, stronger, and preferable size. We'll see how Ingram does on the shuttles and cones. Oh yeah, Spencer was a starter for his team in college, and he was more productive statistically but they are comparable.

It really is the closest comparison for Ingram, and yet Ingram comes up short compared to Spencer (no pun). However, some of you are willing to take the risk that Ingram will somehow be better than Spencer in the NFL at a position he has never played before?

I don't get it. It's irrational.

Rational would be to compare their respective play on the field. If you have seen them both play, tell me how they compare. Compare Spencer at Purdue to Ingram at SC. If you say they are the same, you are entitled to that opinion. But don't say, based on the paper result, the combine result they are the same. I don't know how you would consider it rational to compare player A to player B based solely on how they 'stack' up on paper and not compare their play.

[TheCount]

Originally Posted by cobra

The guy that Ingram is the most "eerily similar to"?






Anthony Spencer. Can't understand how you people are not seeing that. A little less productive in college than Spencer and a little less physically impressive. But the damn guy is a lesser, unproven image of Anthony Spencer, who you want to replace with Ingram. I don't get it.

Anthony Spencer at the Combine
Height: 6027
Weight: 261
Arms: 32.5
40 yd: 4.7
10 yd: 1.64
Bench: 30 reps
Vert: 32.5"
Broad: 9'04"
20yd Shuttle: 4.43
3 cone: 7.14

Melvin Ingram at the Combine
Height: 6011 [inch and half shorter]
Weight: 264 [3 lbs heavier]
Arms: 31.5 [shorter arms]
40 yd: 4.79 [.09 secs slower]
10 yard: 1.72 [slower burst]
Bench: 28 reps [2 less reps]
Vert: 34.5" [2 inches higher]
[View Full Quote]Broad: 9'1" [3 inches shorter]
20yd Shuttle: ???
3 cone: ???

They are very close, but Spencer has slightly preferable results in everything, with the exception of the vertical jump. Spencer was faster overall, faster out of the blocks, stronger, and preferable size. We'll see how Ingram does on the shuttles and cones. Oh yeah, Spencer was a starter for his team in college, and he was more productive statistically but they are comparable.

It really is the closest comparison for Ingram, and yet Ingram comes up short compared to Spencer (no pun). However, some of you are willing to take the risk that Ingram will somehow be better than Spencer in the NFL at a position he has never played before?

I don't get it. It's irrational.

You're basing your opinion of Ingram on his combine numbers?