What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Player Spotlight: Brandon Jacobs (1 Viewer)

Jason Wood

Jason Wood

Zoo York
2007 Player Spotlight Series

Over the course of the offseason, we will be evaluating a multitude of players at every fantasy position. One such way we go about that is through the Player Spotlight series. Think of the Spotlights as a permanent record on some of the more intriguing players for the upcoming season. Each Spotlight will be featured in an article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Brandon Jacobs, RB, New York Giants

Player Page Link: Brandon Jacobs Player Page

Each article will include:

Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member

Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads
FBG Projections
Consensus Member ProjectionsThe Rules

In order for this thread to provide sustainable value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

Focus commentary on the player in question, and your expectations for said player
Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"
To be included in the final synopsis and consensus outlook, you MUST provide projections for the playerProjections should include (at a minimum):

For QBs: Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Yards, Rush TDs
For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs
For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDsBest of Luck and ENJOY!

 
Not a very big Jacobs supporter. Will share the load with Reuben and may even lose some time to Ahmad Bradshaw assuming he makes the team.

200 carries, 800 yards, 8 TD

24 catches, 180 yds, 0 TD

 
I think he will do great:

250 / 1200 / 11

30 / 250 / 1

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reasons Jacobs will be a bust for anyone drafting him in FF this season, and these apply for any scoring format:

1) He has never been a feature RB - There is a reason for this, do not overlook the obvious here!. Being third string at Auburn and splitting time at SIU were root cause issues, not situational. There will be pages of BS from his supporters explaining why he never had a chance or citing examples of other guys who weren't successful in college that bloomed in the NFL. Don't listen to that, those guys weren't 6'4" 265 lb sitting targets. Jacobs is a modern day battleship....impressive to look at, yet very limited in application.

2) Follow the money - Droughns gets paid more than he does. If the Giants really thought Jacobs were the man, they would not have traded for a feature RB like Droughns (one of only 10 RB's in the NFL to rush for 1200 yards twice since 2004). The Giants could have added some traditional back-up through FA and paid less for him, but chose to go with a proven three down RB. Not to mention they added Bradshaw through the draft, too.

3) No Tiki will actually hurt him - Barber was the guy who got Jacobs scoring chances. Without him, Jacobs will have fewer TD's this year than last season even though he'll get more touches. The entire Giants offense will suffer greatly without Barber.

Conclusion: Avoid Jacobs like the plague bacause that's essentially what he is....a disease that will kill your entire team.

Jacobs 140 carries for 590 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Jacobs will have an increased role in the offense from what he had last year but some of the #'s I've seen from people make me wonder.

3 facts that scare me about Jacobs.

1) He is going against a guy that ran for 1200 yards in Cleveland (which is very impressive)

2) He is going against a guy who has carried the load before

3) Jacobs has never had more than 100 carries in a year

I put him in the 20 to 30 ranking based more on his td oppurtunities.

200 carries 800 yards

10 catches 40 yards

12 td's

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last season the Tiki led Giants rushed the ball 455 times (approx 46.5%) vs 523 passes +/-

I've watched alot of Giant games and have not been overly impressed with Eli Manning and am of the mind that he won't be much more than he's already shown us to date .. a middle of the road QB with huge expectations placed squarely on his shoulders due to his last name and where he plays ... I don't feel he's going to suddenly have the light come on this year or any other year and suddenly become a Pro Bowl QB.

The departure of Barber leaves a massive hole in the Giants offence and as big a man as Jacobs is and even the addition of Droughns & Bradshaw & the return of Ward leaves everyone wondering who will carry the load for the G-Men this year. I see Coughlin actually increasing the number of rush attempts this year with a RBBC approach with Jacobs getting the bulk of the load (55%)

260/1070/8 - 32/270/1

:lol:

 
UW72 said:
I think he will do great:250 / 1200 / 1130 / 250 / 1
Click to expand...
I see just under 1000 yds rushing and about 10 total TDs... I would say about 220 carries w/ a 4.3 YPCI do however believe that his recs total will be higher than most people think, say in the 50 range... BJ has good hands for a large back.
 
In a clear RBBC situation on a team clearly on the decline. The Giants have a bad offensive line and play in a tough defensive division. I dont expect Jacobs to put up good #s and although he will be the goalline back the Giants poor play may limit his TD chances. Plus he is not a threat catching the ball so I expect to see alot of Droughns in the 2nd half if the Giants are losing. This will keep Jacobs ypc low because bruising RBs usually wear down a defense in the 1st half and pile up big #s in the 2nd half. I think Jacobs will be lucky to put up RB3 #s.

200 att, 760 yds, 8 tds, 10 rec, 80 yds

 
Things to ponder over while sipping your morning coffee . . .

- Droughns took a 50% pay cut when he reworked his deal after coming to the Giants. He can get most of that money back through incentive clauses, but he would have seen the money automatically if he didn't redo his deal.

- I have been following this situation closely and have seen several articles on the Droughns/Jacobs situation where beat writers, reporters, teammates, and coaches clearly favor Jacobs as their guy and I have not seen anywhere where this is an open competition. Only Droughns (and his agent) seem to have mentioned splitting the carries.

- I started a poll on this very subject several weeks ago. LINK

- What happens when teams lose a Top 10 RB? Their rushing totals suffer on average a drop of 12% in rushing yardage and 23% in rushing TD.

IMO, Jacobs will start the year far more the primary ball carrier and will continue to get the goal line carries. How well he does will determine how much work Droughns will get. If I were to guess a breakdown of carries, I would take a stab at this point of 60-65% Jacobs and 35-40% Droughns.

 
not impressed with Jacobs, at all. there is a massive hole left where Tiki Barber used to play, and neither Droughns nor Jacobs will fill that void. Teams will stack 8-9 in the box, stop the run dead in its tracks, and force Eli to throw. its a recipe for disaster for the Giants. Jacobs will be the biggest bust, most overdrafted player in fantasy drafts. he'll go WAY to early for my liking. Reuben Droguhsn will be the main ball carrier for tge Giants this season,he'll be the 1200 yard back,while Jacobs will rush for somewhere around 600 yards, and 2-3 tds.

a new offense is being installed by OC Kevin Gilbride. Combine that with the loss of Tiki Barber, an overachieving o-line , and no WR capable of taking up the slack for the aging Amani Toomer, and we have the formula for a 4-5 win team in 2007.

 
nygiants56 said:
not impressed with Jacobs, at all. there is a massive hole left where Tiki Barber used to play, and neither Droughns nor Jacobs will fill that void. Teams will stack 8-9 in the box, stop the run dead in its tracks, and force Eli to throw. its a recipe for disaster for the Giants. Jacobs will be the biggest bust, most overdrafted player in fantasy drafts. he'll go WAY to early for my liking. Reuben Droguhsn will be the main ball carrier for tge Giants this season,he'll be the 1200 yard back,while Jacobs will rush for somewhere around 600 yards, and 2-3 tds.a new offense is being installed by OC Kevin Gilbride. Combine that with the loss of Tiki Barber, an overachieving o-line , and no WR capable of taking up the slack for the aging Amani Toomer, and we have the formula for a 4-5 win team in 2007.
Click to expand...
If teams stack the box (something they rarely had to do against Tiki) it will open things up in the passing game. Shockey and Plax won't be getting double teamed. The Giants will run play action all day. How is Jacobs forcing teams to make those types of decisions a negative?Gilbride is NOT installing a new offense. He may emphasize different things but it will still be the same TC/ Jacksonville offense.There is no basis for labeling an o-line that has been consistently among the best in the league the past couple seasons as "overachieving".If/ how Toomer comes back is a legitimate question but the Giants have been preparing for that eventuality. No reason either one of or both Sinorice Moss and Steve Smith can't pick up the slack.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow and here I was thinking that Jacobs was gonna be a beast - the type of back that needs 25 carries a game and only gets stronger as the game wears on.

 
H.K. said:
2) Follow the money - Droughns gets paid more than he does. If the Giants really thought Jacobs were the man, they would not have traded for a feature RB like Droughns (one of only 10 RB's in the NFL to rush for 1200 yards twice since 2004). The Giants could have added some traditional back-up through FA and paid less for him, but chose to go with a proven three down RB. Not to mention they added Bradshaw through the draft, too.
Click to expand...
We've covered all this before in the other thread, but I'll put it here too. Droughns took a pay cut and also is making near the minimum. Jacobs is making less than him because he's still on his rookie deal.

The Giants only traded the oft injured Tim Carter for Droughns. Thats hardly a high price. Had they truly been seeking a top RB, they could have easily gone after TJones or THenry. They didn't. They got a cheap alternative. They weren't in the market for a primary back, they sought a complimentary back.

"We think he gives us a nice veteran presence and compliments Brandon Jacobs and the rest of our running back group nicely," general manager Jerry Reese said.
Click to expand...
Droughns ypc has been declining for the past 3 years, culminating in a pitiful 3.4 ypc last year. Bradshaw is a dissimilar player to either Jacobs or Droughns. If he can stay on the field, he'd work very well as a change of pace back. I don't view a 7th round selection of a player as a statement about the Giants' opinion on Jacobs.

With that said, I don't see the Giants offense as posting all that many TDs, so I dont expect a high TD total.

275/1210/9 (4.4 ypc)

30/240/1

 
There are two many blanks to fill in for Brandon Jacobs to be a successful fantasy running back in 2007. He was unable to be priductive at his first college team and transferred to non-football power Southern Illinois. He was drafted in the fourth round three years ago. He has performed adequately as a Tiki Barber break provider and improved in his short yardage role, but has not had any game in the past two years where he saw more than eleven carries and only three with over 10 carries. Only 14 targets in two years, in an offense that regularly uses the RB as a safety valve.

He also has an effective RB that has been acquired to at a minimum join him in a RBBC role with the Giants. Just too many leaps for me to be a solid backer of Brandon Jacobs heading into 2007. I see the Giants moving their offense further into the passing game and both Droughns and Jacobs being used in a full-fledged RBBC.

Jacobs 180 carries for 684 yards (3.8 ypc) and 12 receptions for 90 yards and 9 total TDs

 
I've already made my thoughts regarding Jacobs abundantly clear:

Who Wins the Jacobs/Droughns RB Battle?

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...316805&st=0

Brandon Jacobs - dynasty, Buy/hold or sell?

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...82030&st=50

Giants tell Droughns he'll split time with Jacobs

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...308759&st=0

Brandon Jacobs is a special talent.

I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).

Barring injury I see him having a major impact and being one of the top stories of 2007. (I'm calling it now: revisiting the 2005 Draft and debating what order the "Auburn" RBs should have been drafted is gonna be a popular topic)...

In FF terms I think the big question is: what kind of value will he present? And that I think will largely be a factor of when people draft. A month or so ago he was being discussed in the 4th/ 5th round range. Now he's creeping into the 3rd. By the time training camp is done I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him going mid/late 1st-early 2nd.

Ultimately I think he ends up producing like a top tier RB1 - so even at that point he still presents value - he just won't be the "2005 Larry Johnson" type steal he could have been.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
H.K. said:
Reasons Jacobs will be a bust for anyone drafting him in FF this season, and these apply for any scoring format:

1) He has never been a feature RB - There is a reason for this, do not overlook the obvious here!. Being third string at Auburn and splitting time at SIU were root cause issues, not situational. There will be pages of BS from his supporters explaining why he never had a chance or citing examples of other guys who weren't successful in college that bloomed in the NFL. Don't listen to that, those guys weren't 6'4" 265 lb sitting targets. Jacobs is a modern day battleship....impressive to look at, yet very limited in application.

2) Follow the money - Droughns gets paid more than he does. If the Giants really thought Jacobs were the man, they would not have traded for a feature RB like Droughns (one of only 10 RB's in the NFL to rush for 1200 yards twice since 2004). The Giants could have added some traditional back-up through FA and paid less for him, but chose to go with a proven three down RB. Not to mention they added Bradshaw through the draft, too.

3) No Tiki will actually hurt him - Barber was the guy who got Jacobs scoring chances. Without him, Jacobs will have fewer TD's this year than last season even though he'll get more touches. The entire Giants offense will suffer greatly without Barber.

Conclusion: Avoid Jacobs like the plague bacause that's essentially what he is....a disease that will kill your entire team.

Jacobs 140 carries for 590 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's.
Click to expand...
:banned:
 
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
Droughns took a pay cut and also is making near the minimum. Jacobs is making less than him because he's still on his rookie deal.
Click to expand...
Fact.
Click to expand...
So is the non-bolded portion of my statement. Really HK, havent you gotten enough of this by now?
Click to expand...
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
 
As far I'm concerned, I hope people are down on Jacobs on draft day so I can snag him. Jacobs has a much better upside than Droughns in my opinion.

 
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.

 
H.K. said:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.
Click to expand...
Or really? Who could they have gotten for less money?
 
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.
Click to expand...
Or really? Who could they have gotten for less money?
Click to expand...
They could have gone with Jacobs, Ward, Grant (one of only seven ND RB's to rush for 1K in college according to his bio) & still added Bradshaw in the draft....of course, that would have been only if they truly believed Jacobs could be a feature RB. Obviously, this was not the case, so they went out and got a proven guy.
 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.
Click to expand...
Or really? Who could they have gotten for less money?
Click to expand...
They could have gone with Jacobs, Ward, Grant (one of only seven ND RB's to rush for 1K in college according to his bio) & still added Bradshaw in the draft....of course, that would have been only if they truly believed Jacobs could be a feature RB. Obviously, this was not the case, so they went out and got a proven guy.
Click to expand...
It's the "obviously" part that I think a lot of people disagree with. I don't own either, and am not specifically targetting either in redrafts. That being said, I believe we have seen Reuben Droughns' ceiling (which is not a bad set of numbers, truly) but I think Jacobs represents the higher upside, fantasy-wise. The Giants brought Droughns in because he can play, not necessarily because he is better than Jacobs. As an NFL move, I think this was a good one, as the retirement of Tiki presented a changing of the guard in NY. The only fact we have is that no one knows whether or not Jacobs will be a stud because he has not had to be one yet. The Giants are hedging their bets, even if they plan to give Droughns a large number of carries.

 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.
Click to expand...
Or really? Who could they have gotten for less money?
Click to expand...
They could have gone with Jacobs, Ward, Grant (one of only seven ND RB's to rush for 1K in college according to his bio) & still added Bradshaw in the draft....of course, that would have been only if they truly believed Jacobs could be a feature RB. Obviously, this was not the case, so they went out and got a proven guy.
Click to expand...
So in your world, teams would rather have 1 stud and no depth. That backfield gives them a grand total of 5 years NFL experience between 4 players. In your world, wouldn't San Diego, who has the biggest stud of them all, done everything in their power to trade away Turner this offseason? Bringing in a veteran backup for a low salary, especially when you have an untested starter. Giants did it with Eli when they signed Warner. You act like the Giants have made a significant investment in Droughns, when they only gave up a never was in Carter and aren't paying him much more than the league minimum.

If they were truly after a feature RB, dont you think they'd have showed some interest in McGahee, THenry, TJones, DRhodes, or even JLewis?

Just because the Giants are covering their ###, doesn't mean they dont expect Jacobs to be the feature RB. It would have been irresponsible for them to proceed to the season without some decent depth at RB, especially considering the rate of injury at that position.

 
BigRed said:
H.K. said:
That's pure spin.
Click to expand...
sweet, the pot/kettle thing.No, its actually not. The Giants did not have to do anything if they were comfortable with the RB situation, but their actions speak louder than words.

Jacobs is 1A, Droughns 1B. Lack of carries by either really hurts their FF value.

Jacobs will be the GL guy, and get some work, so you're premise is right to some extent. Both won't have much value unless (until?) Jacobs gets hurt.
Click to expand...
 
Construction Man Jim said:
I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).
Click to expand...
Can i please see your non-conservative estimates? If 1,750 yards/15 TD's is conservative then i don't know the definition of that word.
 
dparker713 said:
It would have been irresponsible for them to proceed to the season without some decent depth at RB, especially considering the rate of injury at that position.
Click to expand...
Exactly. With Droughns they have a #1 and Jacobs gives them depth at #2.The Giants know Coughlin will be gone next season and don't want to make any major moves until their new HC is in place. Droughns will be the stop gap this year and then the new HC can bring in an RB suited to whatever offense he'll be running, depending on who the new coach is....these tea leaves are pretty damn easy to read for the general public, but I have the advantage of getting my information from Exit 16W, so I can confirm it here for everyone's benefit.
 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
It would have been irresponsible for them to proceed to the season without some decent depth at RB, especially considering the rate of injury at that position.
Click to expand...
Exactly. With Droughns they have a #1 and Jacobs gives them depth at #2.The Giants know Coughlin will be gone next season and don't want to make any major moves until their new HC is in place. Droughns will be the stop gap this year and then the new HC can bring in an RB suited to whatever offense he'll be running, depending on who the new coach is....these tea leaves are pretty damn easy to read for the general public, but I have the advantage of getting my information from Exit 16W, so I can confirm it here for everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...
So, you're claiming a) the Giants are essentially writing this season off, b) so they're going to start a middling at best RB rather than try out a talented backup, c) no matter what Coughlin does he's gone, and d) Coughlin does not have the final say on who the starting RB is.So, who exactly is your source within the Giants? Cause I think you're full of something.
 
dparker713 said:
So, you're claiming a) the Giants are essentially writing this season off,

Coughlin is gone unless this team makes a deep playoff run, do you really think that will happen? The Giants have written off Coughlin. This team knows this and will implode, its just a matter of when.

b) so they're going to start a middling at best RB rather than try out a talented backup,

See a), Coughlin must play the guys that give him the best chance to win. This is not his time to experiment.

c) no matter what Coughlin does he's gone,

see a)

d) Coughlin does not have the final say on who the starting RB is.

See b)

So, who exactly is your source within the Giants?

I never reveal my sources

Cause I think you're full of something.

I am...all the way up to my eyeballs. However, that's another matter. In this particular instance I have the benefit of knowing how things will play out ahead of time....just trying to help.
Click to expand...
 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
So, you're claiming a) the Giants are essentially writing this season off,

Coughlin is gone unless this team makes a deep playoff run, do you really think that will happen? The Giants have written off Coughlin. This team knows this and will implode, its just a matter of when.

b) so they're going to start a middling at best RB rather than try out a talented backup,

See a), Coughlin must play the guys that give him the best chance to win. This is not his time to experiment.

c) no matter what Coughlin does he's gone,

see a)

d) Coughlin does not have the final say on who the starting RB is.

See b)

So, who exactly is your source within the Giants?

I never reveal my sources

Cause I think you're full of something.

I am...all the way up to my eyeballs. However, that's another matter. In this particular instance I have the benefit of knowing how things will play out ahead of time....just trying to help.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Since you didnt understand, let me spell it out for you. You said the Giants did not sign anyone of note so that the next coach could bring in whomever they wanted. Meaning that the Giants front office has decided not to try to put the best team on the field this year. They are preparing to fail this season. And this is according to a 'source' you wont reveal. Does this 'source' also mention who they're going to bring in to replace Eli after the fans and the media run him out of town this year after this plan is successful?
 
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
So, you're claiming a) the Giants are essentially writing this season off,

Coughlin is gone unless this team makes a deep playoff run, do you really think that will happen? The Giants have written off Coughlin. This team knows this and will implode, its just a matter of when.

b) so they're going to start a middling at best RB rather than try out a talented backup,

See a), Coughlin must play the guys that give him the best chance to win. This is not his time to experiment.

c) no matter what Coughlin does he's gone,

see a)

d) Coughlin does not have the final say on who the starting RB is.

See b)

So, who exactly is your source within the Giants?

I never reveal my sources

Cause I think you're full of something.

I am...all the way up to my eyeballs. However, that's another matter. In this particular instance I have the benefit of knowing how things will play out ahead of time....just trying to help.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Since you didnt understand, let me spell it out for you. You said the Giants did not sign anyone of note so that the next coach could bring in whomever they wanted. Meaning that the Giants front office has decided not to try to put the best team on the field this year. They are preparing to fail this season. And this is according to a 'source' you wont reveal. Does this 'source' also mention who they're going to bring in to replace Eli after the fans and the media run him out of town this year after this plan is successful?
Click to expand...
You may not believe that teams in the NFL know they won't be competitive for a season or two and try the best they can to shorten the process until they get better by putting themselves in a position to turn things around quickly. The Giants are in that situation, whether you choose to believe that or not is your decision. However, I would ask that you move the Eli questions to his spotlight thread. This is a Jacobs thread, I have posted information pertinent to him and will keep it that way for the betterment of the board.
 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
H.K. said:
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Just trying to set the record straight. I said Droughns is getting paid more and he is. No matter what spin is put on the financial situation, the Giants brought in somebody else and paid him more, regardless of what window dressing is put on it.
Click to expand...
There is no "spin". Jacobs' initial 4 year deal was dictated by where he was drafted. Rookie contracts can not be renegotiated in the first two years. He is only now entering his third year...

Droughns is entering his 8th season. He has to be making more based on the vet minimums laid out in the CBA.
Click to expand...
That's pure spin.The Giants chose to pay someone more than Jacobs by going after a proven vet. Nobody held a gun to their head, they had plenty of other options and they could have done plenty of other things to address the RB position for less money, yet they chose Droughns. Period.
Click to expand...
Or really? Who could they have gotten for less money?
Click to expand...
They could have gone with Jacobs, Ward, Grant (one of only seven ND RB's to rush for 1K in college according to his bio) & still added Bradshaw in the draft....of course, that would have been only if they truly believed Jacobs could be a feature RB. Obviously, this was not the case, so they went out and got a proven guy.
Click to expand...
I would have to agree with this assessment. Let's look at the situation: they drafted a RB in the 7th round that complements Jacobs running style perfectly, traded away a backup receiver in Carter, brought in a mediocre running back that fits nicely as a backup (who also signed a small contract, is old, and had no interest from other teams), have stated in every public statement as a team that Jacobs will get the opportunity to carry the load, and most importantly last year Jacobs improved in every area of the game. Signs point to Droughns being the guy...I'm not sure if Jacobs will be able to carry the full load, and historically backs of his size have not done well in a feature role. There have been a few, though, and he may just be able to buck the trend. Even if he can't carry the full load, he should catch some balls, get 250 carries, and score 10 TDs, and you simply aren't giving him enough credit.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
H.K. said:
Reasons Jacobs will be a bust for anyone drafting him in FF this season, and these apply for any scoring format:

1) He has never been a feature RB - There is a reason for this, do not overlook the obvious here!. Being third string at Auburn and splitting time at SIU were root cause issues, not situational. There will be pages of BS from his supporters explaining why he never had a chance or citing examples of other guys who weren't successful in college that bloomed in the NFL. Don't listen to that, those guys weren't 6'4" 265 lb sitting targets. Jacobs is a modern day battleship....impressive to look at, yet very limited in application.

2) Follow the money - Droughns gets paid more than he does. If the Giants really thought Jacobs were the man, they would not have traded for a feature RB like Droughns (one of only 10 RB's in the NFL to rush for 1200 yards twice since 2004). The Giants could have added some traditional back-up through FA and paid less for him, but chose to go with a proven three down RB. Not to mention they added Bradshaw through the draft, too.

3) No Tiki will actually hurt him - Barber was the guy who got Jacobs scoring chances. Without him, Jacobs will have fewer TD's this year than last season even though he'll get more touches. The entire Giants offense will suffer greatly without Barber.

Conclusion: Avoid Jacobs like the plague bacause that's essentially what he is....a disease that will kill your entire team.

Jacobs 140 carries for 590 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
Click to expand...
Bust, Bust Bust (*& Bust - Jacobs wont finish the Season as a Starting Running back, guys that big never last, Never unless your John Riggins and Jacobs could not carry Riggins Jock.
 
FBGPoker said:
Construction Man Jim said:
I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).
Click to expand...
Can i please see your non-conservative estimates? If 1,750 yards/15 TD's is conservative then i don't know the definition of that word.
Click to expand...
He's entirely capable of putting up 2,000 total yards and 15+ TDs.
 
H.K. said:
They could have gone with Jacobs, Ward, Grant (one of only seven ND RB's to rush for 1K in college according to his bio) & still added Bradshaw in the draft....of course, that would have been only if they truly believed Jacobs could be a feature RB. Obviously, this was not the case, so they went out and got a proven guy.
Click to expand...
Trying to follow the logic here...Ward was injured most of last season and didn't have a single carry. He ended the season on injured reserve. Grant was on the practice squad in 2005 and missed all of last season on the non-football injury list (he wouldn't have made the team anyway). Bringing in Droughns speaks to that fact that the Giants didn't want to rely on those two guys. It's not a reflection on how they feel about Jacobs. Adding some quality depth was a perfectly reasonable and not unexpected move. To head into the season with nothing behind an unproven starter would have been an act of gross negligence on the part of Jerry Reese.
 
H.K. said:
Exactly. With Droughns they have a #1 and Jacobs gives them depth at #2.The Giants know Coughlin will be gone next season and don't want to make any major moves until their new HC is in place. Droughns will be the stop gap this year and then the new HC can bring in an RB suited to whatever offense he'll be running, depending on who the new coach is....these tea leaves are pretty damn easy to read for the general public, but I have the advantage of getting my information from Exit 16W, so I can confirm it here for everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...
Is this the same source that told you the Giants were going to spend a high round pick on a RB? Or did you just misread the "tea leaves" on that one?
 
Construction Man Jim said:
FBGPoker said:
Construction Man Jim said:
I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).
Click to expand...
Can i please see your non-conservative estimates? If 1,750 yards/15 TD's is conservative then i don't know the definition of that word.
Click to expand...
He's entirely capable of putting up 2,000 total yards and 15+ TDs.
Click to expand...
So you think he could end up as a Top 3 RB???
 
H.K. said:
dparker713 said:
So, you're claiming a) the Giants are essentially writing this season off,

Coughlin is gone unless this team makes a deep playoff run, do you really think that will happen? The Giants have written off Coughlin. This team knows this and will implode, its just a matter of when.

b) so they're going to start a middling at best RB rather than try out a talented backup,

See a), Coughlin must play the guys that give him the best chance to win. This is not his time to experiment.

c) no matter what Coughlin does he's gone,

see a)

d) Coughlin does not have the final say on who the starting RB is.

See b)

So, who exactly is your source within the Giants?

I never reveal my sources

Cause I think you're full of something.

I am...all the way up to my eyeballs. However, that's another matter. In this particular instance I have the benefit of knowing how things will play out ahead of time....just trying to help.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
:lmao: By the general "Rebuilding" or "Play to Lose" logic, wouldn't you start the lesser talent (not the stud that has cracked 1200 yards for 2 years straight).

I suppose Jacobs owners should rejoice then, according to H.K.

 
Iron_Far said:
:confused:

By the general "Rebuilding" or "Play to Lose" logic, wouldn't you start the lesser talent (not the stud that has cracked 1200 yards for 2 years straight).

I suppose Jacobs owners should rejoice then, according to H.K.
Click to expand...
When did I say the Giants were trying to lose?There is a big difference between trying to win and being capable of winning. Another example is the Raiders. We all know the Raiders won't be competitive this year, but they'll at least try to win when they play. They'll put their best team on the field in an attempt to win, but it won't be good enough. Same with the Giants, which is why Droughns will play a lot.

Does anyone in their right mind expect the Giants to win the Super Bowl this year? Of course not. Most sane people don't even expect them to be in the playoff hunt, and they won't be because they are not good enough. If we know this as fans, you think the front office has a pretty good idea about it, too?

This is Coughlin's last year, the Giants will go in a new direction after the season. A lot will change by the end of the season on what coaches are available, so they are in a holding pattern so to speak. Coughlin was supposed to be gone last year, but NYG couldn't get the guy they wanted and after they looked at other options they decided to stick with Coughlin for one more year and make their big changes in 2008. It makes sense to not want to hire an HC for one year before going after the guy they really want. I've probably said too much already, but most of this has already been touched on by the press anyway.

 
Construction Man Jim said:
H.K. said:
Exactly. With Droughns they have a #1 and Jacobs gives them depth at #2.The Giants know Coughlin will be gone next season and don't want to make any major moves until their new HC is in place. Droughns will be the stop gap this year and then the new HC can bring in an RB suited to whatever offense he'll be running, depending on who the new coach is....these tea leaves are pretty damn easy to read for the general public, but I have the advantage of getting my information from Exit 16W, so I can confirm it here for everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...
Is this the same source that told you the Giants were going to spend a high round pick on a RB? Or did you just misread the "tea leaves" on that one?
Click to expand...
That person got fired, the new guy is higher up.
 
Construction Man Jim said:
FBGPoker said:
Construction Man Jim said:
I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).
Click to expand...
Can i please see your non-conservative estimates? If 1,750 yards/15 TD's is conservative then i don't know the definition of that word.
Click to expand...
He's entirely capable of putting up 2,000 total yards and 15+ TDs.
Click to expand...
You're delusional. Living in NY Ive seen every Giants game. Hes not that good.
 
shadyridr said:
Construction Man Jim said:
FBGPoker said:
Construction Man Jim said:
I stand by my earlier projections: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs (and still feel they are on the conservative side).
Click to expand...
Can i please see your non-conservative estimates? If 1,750 yards/15 TD's is conservative then i don't know the definition of that word.
Click to expand...
He's entirely capable of putting up 2,000 total yards and 15+ TDs.
Click to expand...
You're delusional. Living in NY Ive seen every Giants game. Hes not that good.
Click to expand...
I think those numbers are achievable....for his entire career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Scoresman
2025 Shark Pool Rankings Contest - Taking Submissions - Consensus Rankings are here! Sort of...
Replies
11
Views
354
Scoresman
Scoresman
T
Travdogg's positional rankings (summer edition)
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
wgoldsph
wgoldsph
Instinctive
2024 Instinctive's "Take a Second Look" - guys way different from consensus
Replies
45
Views
3K
Desert_Power
Desert_Power

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top