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!

Ahmad Bradshaw Out Indefinitely (1 Viewer)

That being said, I believe Ware is definitely worth a pickup because I don't think Jacobs is a good runner. He's run awful this season in 8.4 carries/game. I also believe the Giants are in trouble and face an incredibly difficult remaining schedule, which will force them to throw. Because they'll want to use Ware in those situations I could see his playing time increasing. Take a look at their remaining schedule:@NE, @SF, Phi, @NO, GB, @Dal, Was, @NYJ, @DalSo my opinion about Jacobs + my opinion on NYG being forced to throw more = Ware is a sneaky smart pickup.
Good points. As long as Ware owners understand they might have to wait a couple of weeks while Jacobs gets the bulk of the carries and he'll have to fail to succeed.If you have room to stash I'd agree it might be worth a shot. Possible Shark Move as they say. :shark:
 
Am I the only one who thinks Coughlin doesn't plan on giving a guy less than two weeks removed from missing two games because of swelling in his knee 20+ touches? Not to mention, someone who has been ineffective averaging 3 yard per carry? I'd be more surprised to see a line of 18-68 and a touchdown than if I saw 10-32. I think his value is completely dependent on scoring a touchdown and I have very little faith in him being able to score on the goal line against this Patriots line.

 
Jacob's is not listed on injury reports anymore. And he's got more experience. I wouldn't be surprised. Right around 18 carries sounds about right to me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NFL Network just listed Bradshaw and Nicks as doubtful on their 2:00 update/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'GManiac said:
Sigmund Bloom@SigmundBloom Sigmund Bloomscott>ware imo ware may have first opp after jacobs, but scott >er talent RT @LottsFinger so who is the NYG rb to pick up? Ware or Scott?3 minutes ago via web Favorite Retweet Reply
A lot of debate already on Ware v Scott. The Ware camp points to his total number of touches as being his upside, the Scott camp points to his superior talent. I heard one homer opinion mention Scott's lack of pass pro skills as the reason he won't get near Ware's touches. I picked up Ware, but my opinion isn't set on this debate. :popcorn:
I'd have to say I prefer Scott in this situation. With Bradshaw out I don't see why the Giants wouldn't try all 3 backs to see who is proving most effective on the day. Jacobs will get the bulk of that opportunity. But I think early in the game you could see a mix of Ware and Scott. Whomever is more successful with their early touches will probably see the majority of work in the 2nd half. That's just my opinion about what I think Coughlin will do.
I like Scott's potential, but I don't see a guy who has gotten 0 carries suddenly getting them split with Ware, who was spelling Bradshaw anywway (and has in the past as well).I'd suspect you're going to see Jacobs and Ware with a little bit of Scott mixed in. I'd be surprised if Scott got more than 5 touches. I could see him being effective and getting more touches in the coming weeks.
It's because to say Ware "spells" Bradshaw would be stretching it. In his best season 2010, Ware played in 14 games for a total of 20 carries for 73 yards and 7 receptions for 67 yards. Ware wasn't even used in garbage time, like last years Houston game. Scott should be active for games with Bradshaw out so he might get a chance to show what he can do.
 
If Bradshaw is out for a significant amount of time...or for the season...it should be Jacobs job to win or lose, right? I would think he gets most of the carries and a shot to succeed. As for Wareisn't he mostly a pickup if you think Jacobs won't succeed?Meaning you'd hold him for a couple of weeks and hope he outplays Jacobs.As for Scottisn't he just a pickup if you think both Jacobs and Ware won't succeed?Meaning you'd have to hold him for who knows how long and even then no telling if he'd be any good. I just don't understand why people are so high on Ware.The only guy I'd see worth starting as of now is Jacobs. If Ware gets the job in a week or two it would probably be by default. Does anyone agree or disagree with this?
Agree with a lot of it, but have a few caveats:Jacobs is probably owned in most leagues, which means there is less talk of going to free agency/waivers to go pick him up. If you're in a thinner/smaller league then yeah, I'd go get Jacobs.That being said, I believe Ware is definitely worth a pickup because I don't think Jacobs is a good runner. He's run awful this season in 8.4 carries/game. I also believe the Giants are in trouble and face an incredibly difficult remaining schedule, which will force them to throw. Because they'll want to use Ware in those situations I could see his playing time increasing. Take a look at their remaining schedule:@NE, @SF, Phi, @NO, GB, @Dal, Was, @NYJ, @DalSo my opinion about Jacobs + my opinion on NYG being forced to throw more = Ware is a sneaky smart pickup.
The Giants running game has only had one good game so far. Seems you're not factoring that in when looking at Jacobs stats. It's not like Bradshaw has been lighting it up. Jacobs will get the bulk of the carries. The running game has been so bad, the team is averaging 3.2 ypc and 27 carries a game. That's not many carries to go around. Jacobs is averaging 3.0ypc and Ware 3.2, not a big difference. Jacobs has 11.8 avrg on 5 catches Ware has 4 for an 8.0 average. Not a big sample to support any argument that Ware will do more than Jacobs or even get an even share.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Coach Tom Coughlin indicated Friday that Ahmad Bradshaw (foot) will have to improve to reach "game-time decision" status this week.

Bradshaw is listed as "doubtful" for Sunday's game against the Patriots, though Coughlin confirmed that surgery is not an option right now. Brandon Jacobs is a good bet for 15-18 touches against the Patriots with D.J. Ware and Da'Rel Scott in change-of-pace roles.

Source: Mike Garafolo on Twitter Nov 4 - 1:08 PM

 
'GManiac said:
Sigmund Bloom

@SigmundBloom Sigmund Bloom

scott>ware imo ware may have first opp after jacobs, but scott >er talent RT @LottsFinger so who is the NYG rb to pick up? Ware or Scott?

3 minutes ago via web Favorite Retweet Reply
A lot of debate already on Ware v Scott. The Ware camp points to his total number of touches as being his upside, the Scott camp points to his superior talent. I heard one homer opinion mention Scott's lack of pass pro skills as the reason he won't get near Ware's touches. I picked up Ware, but my opinion isn't set on this debate. :popcorn:
I'd have to say I prefer Scott in this situation. With Bradshaw out I don't see why the Giants wouldn't try all 3 backs to see who is proving most effective on the day. Jacobs will get the bulk of that opportunity. But I think early in the game you could see a mix of Ware and Scott. Whomever is more successful with their early touches will probably see the majority of work in the 2nd half. That's just my opinion about what I think Coughlin will do.
I like Scott's potential, but I don't see a guy who has gotten 0 carries suddenly getting them split with Ware, who was spelling Bradshaw anywway (and has in the past as well).I'd suspect you're going to see Jacobs and Ware with a little bit of Scott mixed in. I'd be surprised if Scott got more than 5 touches. I could see him being effective and getting more touches in the coming weeks.
It's because to say Ware "spells" Bradshaw would be stretching it. In his best season 2010, Ware played in 14 games for a total of 20 carries for 73 yards and 7 receptions for 67 yards. Ware wasn't even used in garbage time, like last years Houston game. Scott should be active for games with Bradshaw out so he might get a chance to show what he can do.
This makes very little sense to me.Ware was the #3 RB behind Bradshaw and Jacobs. Scott was #4. Now with Bradshaw out Ware becomes #2 and Scott #3.

So... based on that logic the Giants are going to reverse their pattern of giving their #3 RB few carries??

I get it that Ware isn't Bradshaw. But there's a LARGE leap to suddenly assume Scott's role gets massively increased (he has one carry). Of course there's the potential for it... nobody is debating that.

If Bradshaw is out for a significant amount of time...or for the season...

it should be Jacobs job to win or lose, right?

I would think he gets most of the carries and a shot to succeed.

As for Ware

isn't he mostly a pickup if you think Jacobs won't succeed?

Meaning you'd hold him for a couple of weeks and hope he outplays Jacobs.

As for Scott

isn't he just a pickup if you think both Jacobs and Ware won't succeed?

Meaning you'd have to hold him for who knows how long and even then no telling if he'd be any good.

I just don't understand why people are so high on Ware.

The only guy I'd see worth starting as of now is Jacobs.

If Ware gets the job in a week or two it would probably be by default.

Does anyone agree or disagree with this?
Agree with a lot of it, but have a few caveats:Jacobs is probably owned in most leagues, which means there is less talk of going to free agency/waivers to go pick him up. If you're in a thinner/smaller league then yeah, I'd go get Jacobs.

That being said, I believe Ware is definitely worth a pickup because I don't think Jacobs is a good runner. He's run awful this season in 8.4 carries/game. I also believe the Giants are in trouble and face an incredibly difficult remaining schedule, which will force them to throw. Because they'll want to use Ware in those situations I could see his playing time increasing. Take a look at their remaining schedule:

@NE, @SF, Phi, @NO, GB, @Dal, Was, @NYJ, @Dal

So my opinion about Jacobs + my opinion on NYG being forced to throw more = Ware is a sneaky smart pickup.
The Giants running game has only had one good game so far. Seems you're not factoring that in when looking at Jacobs stats. It's not like Bradshaw has been lighting it up. Jacobs will get the bulk of the carries. The running game has been so bad, the team is averaging 3.2 ypc and 27 carries a game. That's not many carries to go around.
Not that many carries to go around... as in passing more? Like I was saying. Jacobs stats aren't good. Bradshaw isn't doing amazing, but he's averaging a full YPC better. So don't blame it on the Giants not being able to run the ball at all. I also, as I said, based this on my opinion that Jacobs isn't a good runner. That's subjective, I realize, which is why I was careful to add "my opinon".

 
'GManiac said:
Sigmund Bloom

@SigmundBloom Sigmund Bloom

scott>ware imo ware may have first opp after jacobs, but scott >er talent RT @LottsFinger so who is the NYG rb to pick up? Ware or Scott?

3 minutes ago via web Favorite Retweet Reply
A lot of debate already on Ware v Scott. The Ware camp points to his total number of touches as being his upside, the Scott camp points to his superior talent. I heard one homer opinion mention Scott's lack of pass pro skills as the reason he won't get near Ware's touches. I picked up Ware, but my opinion isn't set on this debate. :popcorn:
I'd have to say I prefer Scott in this situation. With Bradshaw out I don't see why the Giants wouldn't try all 3 backs to see who is proving most effective on the day. Jacobs will get the bulk of that opportunity. But I think early in the game you could see a mix of Ware and Scott. Whomever is more successful with their early touches will probably see the majority of work in the 2nd half. That's just my opinion about what I think Coughlin will do.
I like Scott's potential, but I don't see a guy who has gotten 0 carries suddenly getting them split with Ware, who was spelling Bradshaw anywway (and has in the past as well).I'd suspect you're going to see Jacobs and Ware with a little bit of Scott mixed in. I'd be surprised if Scott got more than 5 touches. I could see him being effective and getting more touches in the coming weeks.
It's because to say Ware "spells" Bradshaw would be stretching it. In his best season 2010, Ware played in 14 games for a total of 20 carries for 73 yards and 7 receptions for 67 yards. Ware wasn't even used in garbage time, like last years Houston game. Scott should be active for games with Bradshaw out so he might get a chance to show what he can do.
This makes very little sense to me.Ware was the #3 RB behind Bradshaw and Jacobs. Scott was #4. Now with Bradshaw out Ware becomes #2 and Scott #3.

So... based on that logic the Giants are going to reverse their pattern of giving their #3 RB few carries??

I get it that Ware isn't Bradshaw. But there's a LARGE leap to suddenly assume Scott's role gets massively increased (he has one carry). Of course there's the potential for it... nobody is debating that.

If Bradshaw is out for a significant amount of time...or for the season...

it should be Jacobs job to win or lose, right?

I would think he gets most of the carries and a shot to succeed.

As for Ware

isn't he mostly a pickup if you think Jacobs won't succeed?

Meaning you'd hold him for a couple of weeks and hope he outplays Jacobs.

As for Scott

isn't he just a pickup if you think both Jacobs and Ware won't succeed?

Meaning you'd have to hold him for who knows how long and even then no telling if he'd be any good.

I just don't understand why people are so high on Ware.

The only guy I'd see worth starting as of now is Jacobs.

If Ware gets the job in a week or two it would probably be by default.

Does anyone agree or disagree with this?
Agree with a lot of it, but have a few caveats:Jacobs is probably owned in most leagues, which means there is less talk of going to free agency/waivers to go pick him up. If you're in a thinner/smaller league then yeah, I'd go get Jacobs.

That being said, I believe Ware is definitely worth a pickup because I don't think Jacobs is a good runner. He's run awful this season in 8.4 carries/game. I also believe the Giants are in trouble and face an incredibly difficult remaining schedule, which will force them to throw. Because they'll want to use Ware in those situations I could see his playing time increasing. Take a look at their remaining schedule:

@NE, @SF, Phi, @NO, GB, @Dal, Was, @NYJ, @Dal

So my opinion about Jacobs + my opinion on NYG being forced to throw more = Ware is a sneaky smart pickup.
The Giants running game has only had one good game so far. Seems you're not factoring that in when looking at Jacobs stats. It's not like Bradshaw has been lighting it up. Jacobs will get the bulk of the carries. The running game has been so bad, the team is averaging 3.2 ypc and 27 carries a game. That's not many carries to go around.
Not that many carries to go around... as in passing more? Like I was saying. Jacobs stats aren't good. Bradshaw isn't doing amazing, but he's averaging a full YPC better. So don't blame it on the Giants not being able to run the ball at all. I also, as I said, based this on my opinion that Jacobs isn't a good runner. That's subjective, I realize, which is why I was careful to add "my opinon".
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
 
I usually don't get too excited about players making noise....but Jacobs thinks he is a featured back and would like to get paid so in the future....IIRC he has been asking for more carries and a bigger piece of the pie, talk of leaving to go somewhere else, etc.....well he will get his opportunity this weekend on a pretty big stage against the Pats.....NYG throws the ball well enough to keep the defenses honest even if Nicks is out....I think Jcobs could have a nice game

 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Not true- he only has 5 carries all season where he needed 2 yards or less.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Not true- he only has 5 carries all season where he needed 2 yards or less.
Correct. And 33 of his 42 carries have come on 1st and 10 or 2nd and 6 or longer. He's just not good. Pretty simple.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Not true- he only has 5 carries all season where he needed 2 yards or less.
it doesnt even matter. its 42 carries. lol sample size. a decent game and his ypc will rise drastically. its just foolish to predict ability and value based on 42 freakin carries. we really dont know how good he can or will be if he gets a large workload. he was pretty damn great last year in terms of yards per carry (5.6), fwiw.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Not true- he only has 5 carries all season where he needed 2 yards or less.
it doesnt even matter. its 42 carries. lol sample size. a decent game and his ypc will rise drastically. its just foolish to predict ability and value based on 42 freakin carries. we really dont know how good he can or will be if he gets a large workload. he was pretty damn great last year in terms of yards per carry (5.6), fwiw.
Yes, small sample size no doubt, proper caveat. But you're assuming he has a decent game. What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!Subjectively, from watching him, I don't think he's running well at all.Look, if Jacobs is on your waiver wire PICK HIM UP. I don't think anybody is objecting to that logic. He's not on any of mine. But that doesn't exclude getting Ware. I think Ware gets more heavily involved for reasons I've stated above (Jacobs running poorly + passing work)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!
well not really, bc its already low. also, how yards are distributed on a carry. its much easier to gain x yards than lose x yards. as x gets higher this is more evident.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
Ware will get more work than Scott initially. If Bradshaw is out longer than a couple of weeks, I think Scott is more likely to take over for Ware than Ware is likely to keep the job. Ware only has 14 career receptions. I'm not sure he's that much better of a receiver than Jacobs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Not true- he only has 5 carries all season where he needed 2 yards or less.
it doesnt even matter. its 42 carries. lol sample size. a decent game and his ypc will rise drastically. its just foolish to predict ability and value based on 42 freakin carries. we really dont know how good he can or will be if he gets a large workload. he was pretty damn great last year in terms of yards per carry (5.6), fwiw.
I'm not trying to predict ability and value, I'm just correcting him about the short yardage carries. Bradshaw had more and a higher percentage of carries in short yardage situations than Jacobs did.
 
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
Ware will get more work than Scott initially. If Bradshaw is out longer than a couple of weeks, I think Scott is more likely to take over for Ware than Ware is likely to keep the job. Ware only has 14 career receptions. I'm not sure he's that much better of a receiver than Jacobs.
Scott is a rookieHe'll have to show something on a his 1-3 touches to merit more touches. He'll also have to prove that he can handle the ball, the workload and blitz pickup to earn any kind of important role in the offense. I'm not saying he can't do this, just that he has to clear some hurdles.
 
What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!
well not really, bc its already low. also, how yards are distributed on a carry. its much easier to gain x yards than lose x yards. as x gets higher this is more evident.
It was a bit of sarcasm, but if he continues to run poorly his YPC will remain low. The point is, your argument for sample size being the reason his stats are low ASSUMES he will run better. That, in my opinion, is not something I'm willing to do.
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
Ware will get more work than Scott initially. If Bradshaw is out longer than a couple of weeks, I think Scott is more likely to take over for Ware than Ware is likely to keep the job. Ware only has 14 career receptions. I'm not sure he's that much better of a receiver than Jacobs.
Agree on Ware over Scott initially. As I said, an extended absence by Bradshaw would provide Scott an opporunity to get some carries, but he's still behind Ware, the Giants have said as much. The fact that they are comfortable using Ware on 3rd down makes me believe that Ware is a better receiver than Jacobs. That's speculation (and from watching this limited carries), admittedly. Scott has potential. But besides that there is nothing pointing towards him having a more prominent role than Ware. We'll agree to disagree I guess.Again... add Jacobs if he's available, but for those of us without that option I'm adding Ware over Scott 10 times out of 10 (redraft).
 
What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!
well not really, bc its already low. also, how yards are distributed on a carry. its much easier to gain x yards than lose x yards. as x gets higher this is more evident.
It was a bit of sarcasm, but if he continues to run poorly his YPC will remain low. The point is, your argument for sample size being the reason his stats are low ASSUMES he will run better. That, in my opinion, is not something I'm willing to do.
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
Ware will get more work than Scott initially. If Bradshaw is out longer than a couple of weeks, I think Scott is more likely to take over for Ware than Ware is likely to keep the job. Ware only has 14 career receptions. I'm not sure he's that much better of a receiver than Jacobs.
Agree on Ware over Scott initially. As I said, an extended absence by Bradshaw would provide Scott an opporunity to get some carries, but he's still behind Ware, the Giants have said as much. The fact that they are comfortable using Ware on 3rd down makes me believe that Ware is a better receiver than Jacobs. That's speculation (and from watching this limited carries), admittedly. Scott has potential. But besides that there is nothing pointing towards him having a more prominent role than Ware. We'll agree to disagree I guess.Again... add Jacobs if he's available, but for those of us without that option I'm adding Ware over Scott 10 times out of 10 (redraft).
Ware over Silent G though? That's the question.
 
What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!
well not really, bc its already low. also, how yards are distributed on a carry. its much easier to gain x yards than lose x yards. as x gets higher this is more evident.
It was a bit of sarcasm, but if he continues to run poorly his YPC will remain low. The point is, your argument for sample size being the reason his stats are low ASSUMES he will run better. That, in my opinion, is not something I'm willing to do.
Keep in mind too that Jacobs is being used in a lot of short yardage situations. So the combination of a lack of carries combined with situational carries where only 1 - 2 yards are needed tells me that he will be a good play getting most of the carries.
Fair point.I don't disagree he will get most of the carries in the upcoming weeks. I still see Ware getting worked in more if Bradshaw is unable to go. And I think it's more likely Ware than Scott.
Ware will get more work than Scott initially. If Bradshaw is out longer than a couple of weeks, I think Scott is more likely to take over for Ware than Ware is likely to keep the job. Ware only has 14 career receptions. I'm not sure he's that much better of a receiver than Jacobs.
Agree on Ware over Scott initially. As I said, an extended absence by Bradshaw would provide Scott an opporunity to get some carries, but he's still behind Ware, the Giants have said as much. The fact that they are comfortable using Ware on 3rd down makes me believe that Ware is a better receiver than Jacobs. That's speculation (and from watching this limited carries), admittedly. Scott has potential. But besides that there is nothing pointing towards him having a more prominent role than Ware. We'll agree to disagree I guess.Again... add Jacobs if he's available, but for those of us without that option I'm adding Ware over Scott 10 times out of 10 (redraft).
Ware over Silent G though? That's the question.
You can't start someone who isn't guaranteed to touch the ball 10 times over someone who is going to be a three down back.
 
There seems to be mixed reports on the severity of Bradshaw's injury. A guy in one of my leagues overreacted and dropped Bradshaw and picked up Scott. :eek:

 
What if he has a horrible game? His YPC will drop drastically!
well not really, bc its already low. also, how yards are distributed on a carry. its much easier to gain x yards than lose x yards. as x gets higher this is more evident.
It was a bit of sarcasm, but if he continues to run poorly his YPC will remain low. The point is, your argument for sample size being the reason his stats are low ASSUMES he will run better. That, in my opinion, is not something I'm willing to do.
you think his ypc going forward will be 3? my argument is that ypc for nfl rbs converge to a fairly narrow range. 3 is outside of that range by quite a bit it seems.
 
A Bradshaw owner here.

Rest of year what do we expect here?

I mean he wasn't lighting it up, he was decent, but now won't it be worse the rest of the way.

Reason I ask is there are guy's on the waiver in my 10team league I'd go get but would have to drop Bradshaw.

 
A Bradshaw owner here.Rest of year what do we expect here?I mean he wasn't lighting it up, he was decent, but now won't it be worse the rest of the way.Reason I ask is there are guy's on the waiver in my 10team league I'd go get but would have to drop Bradshaw.
He might play this week, but more likely sits one or two games to allow the stress fracture to heal. Then he will probably sit out of practices and participate in the walk-through. Then play on Sundays. I don't think it will be a situation like Antonio Gates where he starts a game but can't finish.
 
What I was really thinking is, if the info we have now is correct

and he'll play this season but be knicked up, he's got to have less

value as they will spell him more often, an since he wasn't lighting

it up he'd be worse now with this injury?

So I was wondering what others thought of his Production rest of year.

I get he'll play, but how much will his production go down, it could be

to the point of almost being worthless if this hinders him going forward?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If he hasn't been ruled out of Sunday's game...

he isn't "Out Indefinitely"

I don't care what dictionary you're using.

 
Everybody is guessing that jacobs wont last and ware will takeover. Anyone think they will tryout some rbs to . challenge ware for his spot?

Maybe they tryout tiki lol yea right.

 
I have never thought he could handle a full workload for a full season. IIRC last season Jacobs carried the rock and got the start for some games which gave Ahmad a smidge of a break(he still played).

He's a tough runner for a little guy and that just doesn't work well for me when thinking about dynasty prospects.

I think Ahmad is a great guy to trade in dynasty and can fetch a nice return.

 
Everybody is guessing that jacobs wont last and ware will takeover. Anyone think they will tryout some rbs to . challenge ware for his spot? Maybe they tryout tiki lol yea right.
Scott might shine should he get a shot. He's a better pickup than Ware IMO.
I went with Ware but not because I think he is a special talent, I don't know much about Ware or Scott. My reasoning what that it usually takes some reps for rookies to adjust to NFL pass protection and Scott likely is not up to speed at this point. Either way if Bradshaw misses significant time I do not expect Jacobs to be the guy and I consider Ware a lotto ticket likely on a one week audition.
 
Everybody is guessing that jacobs wont last and ware will takeover. Anyone think they will tryout some rbs to . challenge ware for his spot? Maybe they tryout tiki lol yea right.
No. Jacobs was hurt earlier and they did a dance a little bit. Their fourth RB is a guy some folks like around here.Giants have been so very deep at RB for like 10 years now. Not with superstars but simply guys that can play. (Really they need to start trading some depth and refill it but....'nother time 'nother thread)I forget the name of their fourth RB but plenty of folks around here like the guy-he's a rook.Andre Brown is on their practice squad last I checked. He was a pretty high pick, got hurt bad, career over, suddenly showed up spry last summer. No clue if anything will ever come of that guy, but I've never been so shocked at a post surgical performance. He's fifth and if they even have the opportunity to play him, I'm sure they're curious enough to see what he can do. How on earth he looked like the rook RB and not the guy the Broncos cut is beyond me. Some doctor needs to do a before and after video and make that his commercial. Rambling on...there's enough there to wait N see on so I doubt they sign anyone.
 
Everybody is guessing that jacobs wont last and ware will takeover. Anyone think they will tryout some rbs to . challenge ware for his spot? Maybe they tryout tiki lol yea right.
No. Jacobs was hurt earlier and they did a dance a little bit. Their fourth RB is a guy some folks like around here.Giants have been so very deep at RB for like 10 years now. Not with superstars but simply guys that can play. (Really they need to start trading some depth and refill it but....'nother time 'nother thread)I forget the name of their fourth RB but plenty of folks around here like the guy-he's a rook.Andre Brown is on their practice squad last I checked. He was a pretty high pick, got hurt bad, career over, suddenly showed up spry last summer. No clue if anything will ever come of that guy, but I've never been so shocked at a post surgical performance. He's fifth and if they even have the opportunity to play him, I'm sure they're curious enough to see what he can do. How on earth he looked like the rook RB and not the guy the Broncos cut is beyond me. Some doctor needs to do a before and after video and make that his commercial. Rambling on...there's enough there to wait N see on so I doubt they sign anyone.
His name is Da'Rel Scott.
 
I think the question is does ware = t.choice while Scott= murrary? Is that what we potentially have here?
Giant homer, so take this for what it's worth. Just my educated guesses here.Some serious #### would have to happen for Scott to get significant snaps. It's not that he can't do much with a few snaps with his homerun speed, but the most precious commodity on this team Eli Manning. Coughlin is not going to put a guy in the backfield that he doesn't have the utmost confidence that he will not get Manning killed on a blitz.Ware may not be flashy, but he is solid and does everything well, if nothing exceptional. Unless he falls flat on his face contributing behind Jacobs, I'm guessing we'll see little of Scott.Scott may be a good dynasty flyer, but in redraft Ware is easily the guy to have here between the two.
 
'newteech said:
If he hasn't been ruled out of Sunday's game...he isn't "Out Indefinitely"I don't care what dictionary you're using.
He's been ruled out. So, now you should care what dictionary is being used.
 
haven't seen much of Scott...and not sure if others have posted these clips already but its hard to tell if he just has straight line speed or some wiggle to go with it...

I suppose he's worth a flyer in my dynasty league...looked okay in the limited preseason with scrubs chasing him and interesting to note that the Giants didn't let him go through waivers...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ugx8kj4glrY&feature=related

James Davis 2.0?

..time will tell...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is Jacobs in the doghouse at all for his comments? I haven't really seen anything to indicate that he is or isn't but he has been running his mouth more than the ball. Is there any chance that his role remains unchanged and Ware just steps into the Bradshaw lead back role?

Jacobs hasn't really ever been much in the passing game. Does Ware's value increase against a team like New England (potential shootout).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There were no miracle recoveries for Ahmad Bradshaw and Hakeem Nicks. Both will be watching the Giants face the Patriots in Foxborough from home.

As expected, neither player made the trip to New England on Saturday and were downgraded from "doubtful" to "out" of Sunday afternoon's game.
link
 
I have never thought he could handle a full workload for a full season. IIRC last season Jacobs carried the rock and got the start for some games which gave Ahmad a smidge of a break(he still played). He's a tough runner for a little guy and that just doesn't work well for me when thinking about dynasty prospects. I think Ahmad is a great guy to trade in dynasty and can fetch a nice return.
Bradshaw was said to have lost the starting job because of fumbling at that time. It was more of a demotion on paper and Jacobs got the carries on the first series which had previously been Bradshaw.
 
Is Jacobs in the doghouse at all for his comments? I haven't really seen anything to indicate that he is or isn't but he has been running his mouth more than the ball. Is there any chance that his role remains unchanged and Ware just steps into the Bradshaw lead back role?Jacobs hasn't really ever been much in the passing game. Does Ware's value increase against a team like New England (potential shootout).
It's become expected now that Jacobs will make a comment from time to time when he isn't the main RB. Coughlin may talk to him about it but it doesn't go any further because Jacobs usually doesn't have a solid argument. Jacobs in the past has down played his comments or said they were taken out of context a week or two later.
 
I think the question is does ware = t.choice while Scott= murray? Is that what we potentially have here?
I don't think they have anyone that would concern the best RBs in the NFL of losing their throne. They simply have very effective players that aren't stars.(Coughlin=Coughlin/Gilbride)

Scott will probably get some second half work this week. Coughlin has often used a 3rd RB in the second half and is one of the few coaches in the NFL that always seems to have a plan to use fresh legs.

Stacey Mack used to make every difficult short yardage carry while Fragile Freddy got to look like a gazelle making the sweet runs. In NY he switched to a 3 back system most of the time. A million years ago it was Jacobs in first, Ward in second, both in 3rd, Bradshaw cleaning up against a tired D in the fourth and that was (then) the best running team in the NFL. Before that Tiki, Jacobs, and Ward or Tiki, Ward, and Jacobs.

There was a push relatively recently where he went away from the 3rd option some as Bradshaw did very well-this pushed Ware out of the equation some, getting far less as the third back than the previous guys in that role. With Bradshaw hurt, this week and future weeks are very likely to include that third RB being used.

His speed against a tired D really fits with the theory Coughlin used to roll with. Bradshaw would, on occasion, have a wonderful game for FF in just a fourth quarter worth of work, but ya gotta have some real cujones to start a guy in that spot.

The Giants think Eli is better than you'd imagine. Eli is definitely better than most shark pool folks think and that's always been odd around here. Regardless, I doubt they're as concerned about missing Nicks as most teams that lose their top WR. They do have tons of confidence in Mario and Cruz(now). Barden is Barden, I can't shine anything on that guy. I'll tell ya this though, that guy can pluck the ball out of the air like few WRs before him. He has incredible hands. It's been 2-3 weeks with slot WR articles on him. I expect he gets a couple catches then gets hurt again. Ya don't want to plan anything on Barden. Their TE has been impressive when he needed to be. This is likely the route they go and there's the three targets for Eli.

Also, for "forever" everyone that visited Giants camp came back wondering why Jacobs doesn't catch the ball more. I've never understood it. He is deadly along the sideline if they throw him a screen there. No DB can dream of tackling him if he can get up to full speed. He's faster than you think and as big as college linemen. As long as NFL DBs do this fake tackling try and knock you out type showboat tackle, they ain't getting Jacobs down. He does this sideline catch N run every summer and every NFL season he gets put in these spots where he rarely gets into the open field.

Ware is a tough hard nosed runner that can really take a hit and get right back up. He would probably play on one leg. He's not getting injured and giving Scott an opportunity. The guy is as tough as they come. A million years ago, I thought the Jets should have moved him to FB rather than cut him. I was sure he could make that transition with his toughness.

The Giants have zero need to rely on Scott. Again though, using him in the fourth as fresh legs is an option.

 
Bumping...

Scott got 1 carry. Ware got 7. Ware ran okay, not that impressed.

Jacobs ran well, and got 4 catches.

I will still maintain it goes Jacobs, Ware, Scott in terms of pickup. I don't trust Jacobs to run well or stay healthy, so Ware becomes a speculative pickup.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top