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!
Brandon Jacobs (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter punzy123
- Start date
hellz_fireflies
Footballguy
WOW...never knew he was hurt again.
switz
Footballguy
He's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.WOW...never knew he was hurt again.
hellz_fireflies
Footballguy
Not complaining got D.Ward not BJHe's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.WOW...never knew he was hurt again.
eom
Footballguy
which is why I can lock lendale white in w/no worries.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, being built like a superstar doesn't translate to on field accomplishments. Example: Alonzo Spellman!! UGH!!!If anyone can get more info i would appreciate it. I have to start him or Ward this week. Obviously if one is out then the others value goes up tremendously.He's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.WOW...never knew he was hurt again.
hellz_fireflies
Footballguy
How can I put this in football terms. Hmmm..ok how's this on extreme body fat..player wants a longer jock strap and another player wants a wider jock strap..which is better player then to perform?
Avery
Footballguy
He took a helmet to the side of the knee on just about the first offensive play of the season.Perhaps he isn't capable of carrying the full load for a season, but as for me, I'll wait until he's had more of a chance to do so and fail before I decide that the evidence is conclusive.switz said:He's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.hellz_fireflies said:WOW...never knew he was hurt again.punzy123 said:
Avery
Footballguy
As a general thought, the Giants offensive line is playing very well. Much better than expected in both pass and run blocking. Add to that, and partially because of that, Droughns and Ward have had success filling in for Jacobs. This allows Coughlin to be very cautious with Jacobs, giving him additional rest to recover from injuries where Jacobs could have been rushed back if necessary. Jacobs said himself that he could have returned to the game last week if they Giants weren't in command or the running game wasn't going well.
Some point to the additional rest that he has received as evidence that Jacobs can "not carry the load", but it just may be the case that there is no need to rush him back into the lineup full-time when the Giants running game is holding its own without the full dose of Jacobs.
Depth has benefits.
Some point to the additional rest that he has received as evidence that Jacobs can "not carry the load", but it just may be the case that there is no need to rush him back into the lineup full-time when the Giants running game is holding its own without the full dose of Jacobs.
Depth has benefits.
CA_7
Footballguy
Jacobs is questionable on the injury report which translates to 50/50. He was also limited in practice today.
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=3146
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=3146
Koya
Footballguy
My take, and no inside info at all, is that Jacobs is dinged and could play but they will weigh how he feels sunday with how ward feels with how the game is going.
Basically, if they don't need him too much and he is hurting, you will see more or Ward and Droughns (sp?). I wouldnt expect a huge workload, but if he is up to the task you never know.
(sorry, nothing definitive but you do have three capable backs in the stable here)
Basically, if they don't need him too much and he is hurting, you will see more or Ward and Droughns (sp?). I wouldnt expect a huge workload, but if he is up to the task you never know.
(sorry, nothing definitive but you do have three capable backs in the stable here)
mistersmith
Footballguy
Ward's been dinged up also. If the game's out of hand, the majority of the remaing carries could go to Droughns.
Koya
Footballguy
I agree 100%
So, anyone being 6'3 or taller and weighing 250+ pounds should be injury prone, right?I hear people saying this all the time. But Offensive and Defensive Linemen get hit WAY MORE and get their knees hit and tangled WAY MORE that a RB does per game.switz said:He's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.hellz_fireflies said:WOW...never knew he was hurt again.punzy123 said:
What does his SIZE have to do with him getting injured? NOTHING.
If you want to argue about running styles, then maybe that is true. But his SIZE and his injuries this year have NOTHING to do with each other.
swirvenirvin
Footballguy
For you gamblers out there my site was offering a prop on him. Over under 17.5 carries took the under
Might want to look into it since he can't even finish one series let along a game
Might want to look into it since he can't even finish one series let along a game
CA_7
Footballguy
Guess Clayton on ESPN said Jacobs probably won't play but this contradicts that report:
[QUOTE=']As for the Brandon Jacoobs "will he or won't he?" stuff that's flying round the sports networks... I haven't heard anything to the contrary of Jacobs' stated intent to play. Not that TC would have come right out this week and said that his No. 1 back wasn't playing.
Basically, I have no new info. Just like the Chris Mortensen/Eli/shoulder thing from last month, I have the utmost respect for how hard John Clayton works, and he's usually got good sources with the Giants.
In this case, though, I think we have to wait until tomorrow morning to find out about Jacobs. It's fun to try and be first when it comes to injuries week to week, but really, it's near impossible to say unless the team does first.
And TC has never, ever made an early declaration on a guy who was iffy. Ever.
So... I'll still say that Jacobs dresses for the game, based on just being around all week. It's an advantage we have over the ESPN folks.
[/QUOTE]http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/football..._preview_3.html
[QUOTE=']As for the Brandon Jacoobs "will he or won't he?" stuff that's flying round the sports networks... I haven't heard anything to the contrary of Jacobs' stated intent to play. Not that TC would have come right out this week and said that his No. 1 back wasn't playing.
Basically, I have no new info. Just like the Chris Mortensen/Eli/shoulder thing from last month, I have the utmost respect for how hard John Clayton works, and he's usually got good sources with the Giants.
In this case, though, I think we have to wait until tomorrow morning to find out about Jacobs. It's fun to try and be first when it comes to injuries week to week, but really, it's near impossible to say unless the team does first.
And TC has never, ever made an early declaration on a guy who was iffy. Ever.
So... I'll still say that Jacobs dresses for the game, based on just being around all week. It's an advantage we have over the ESPN folks.
[/QUOTE]http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/football..._preview_3.html
Last edited by a moderator:
ready5
Footballguy
switz has been hammering away on this pet theory of his in several threads and no, it's simply not true. i'll grant that extremes of most anything can be detrimental, but we're not dealing in extremes even with a brandon jacobs vs. lendale white comparison. statistically insignificant in general and flat-out spurious in a NFL context.
switz
Footballguy
Link to what? All the anatomy, physiology, nutrition, and dietician courses I took at university?
switz
Footballguy
???? Hammering away at this in several threads? Pet theory? Simply not true?Wrong on all three counts there buddy.
AnonymousBob
Footballguy
switz and ready5, one of you is going to have to post a link. I'm sure you'll both forgive us all if we don't believe either one of you simply because you said it is/isn't true.
switz, what body fat percentage is too low for males before it starts significantly increasing odds of injury?
switz, what body fat percentage is too low for males before it starts significantly increasing odds of injury?
switz
Footballguy
Here: first link on google searchBut at college, the number for males was anything under 5% was too low, and 12-15 was considered "healthy".
Ocho Cinco
Footballguy
Great.. Now I have to decide between him, Watson, and Leonard.
AnonymousBob
Footballguy
What is Jacobs' body fat %?
H.K.
Footballguy
Why use males for the comparison? We're talking about Brenda "heavy flow" Jacobs.For people wanting to know if she'll start, I ask what difference does it make? In six games, she has completely missed three, started three and finished one. Just because she is on the field for the first snap doesn't mean she'll last until the second.
Ward is more than willing to play through the pain and do what it takes to fight for his team, start him and don't worry about Brenda.
The difference is that lineman do not get hit when they are running at top speed. They are also not taking hits while trying to make sharp cuts to change direction.So, anyone being 6'3 or taller and weighing 250+ pounds should be injury prone, right?I hear people saying this all the time. But Offensive and Defensive Linemen get hit WAY MORE and get their knees hit and tangled WAY MORE that a RB does per game.switz said:He's been hurt pretty much since week 1... the guy isn't built to last a season taking a full load.And before you come back with some witty retort about 6'4 4.4 speed etc., being big doesn't mean your ligaments and tendons are made to support your weight. And having too low of a body fat ratio makes you more prone to injuries.hellz_fireflies said:WOW...never knew he was hurt again.punzy123 said:
What does his SIZE have to do with him getting injured? NOTHING.
If you want to argue about running styles, then maybe that is true. But his SIZE and his injuries this year have NOTHING to do with each other.
Construction Man Jim
Footballguy
From what I've heard there's no reason Jacobs won't be good to go.
ready5
Footballguy
so that wasn't you in the Injured Players taking longer to "heal" thread?
- body fat compositionally varies person to person, so any body fat schema is automatically unrepresentative.
in other words, this is a key question:
- if the latter, i already pointed out that the theory is true in extreme cases (e.g. <5% body fat).
- if the former, then you're essentially saying that fat does a better job of asorbing shock than muscle. further, you're saying that someone like lendale white would be less injury prone than brandon jacobs. given your earlier comments about people being too big for their tendons/ligaments, this seems a bit counterintuitive. (also, i would quibble with statements like "made to support" and "naturally designed", but that's a different discussion i really don't feel like getting into.)
also, there are some major problems with causality here:
- brandon jacobs did not get injured in a vaccuum... as an earlier poster stated, he took a helmet to the knee. would a higher body fat percentage have made that injury less likely to occur?
- i assume your argument was more along the lines that a higher body fat percentage would've lessened the damage... but there seems to be an easily slide between "extent of a given injury" and "injury prone in general". honestly, i would say jacobs' upright running style increases his risk of injury far more than his body fat percentage would.
- in other words: i don't know what you would deem to be the proper body fat percentage for jacobs (although i would guess his trainers have that well in hand), but i highly doubt his body fat percentage has any statistically significant bearing on the event of his injury, the extent of the damage given the impact, or on his total recovery time.
sorry i don't have a link, but the burden of proof really isn't on me in this situation... besides, the link switz provided neither proves his theory nor addresses my counterpoint. further, it contains sentences like the following which actually cloud the theory he's trying to purport: "A linebacker needs to have enough body mass (lean and fat weight) to generate high forces and avoid injury."
i have no desire to get in an internet pissing match, so hopefully i can clarify where i'm coming from. by "pet theory" i didn't mean you made it up... the theory that a low body fat percentage leads to higher risk of injury has been kicking around the sports therapy world for a long time. according to my sister (a DPT), the theory only applies in the most extreme cases... of course, she (like most physical therapists) comes from the school that you can compensate for most joint/tendon/ligament weakness though better muscle tone. if that additional muscle is properly conditioned, it can spasm to protect the body from injury in ways that fat simply cannot. obviously joints and organs need a minimum amount of fat for cushioning... but that is in the range of essential fat, which simply doesn't apply here. so like i said before, "statistically insignificant in general and flat-out spurious in a NFL context."
- a male with less than 5% body fat is most likely robbing himself of essential fat and is thus at great risk for a host of problems (the least of which would be increased injury risk).- body fat cannot be measured exactly, so everything's an estimate... many medical sources consider up to 25% for males to still be healthy.
- body fat compositionally varies person to person, so any body fat schema is automatically unrepresentative.
in other words, this is a key question:
- i wouldn't know his exact body fat percentage, but i highly doubt jacobs is anywhere close to robbing himself of essential fat.- so the question is: are you standing behind your earlier comment of "as these body fat %'s get lower and lower, the body is less able to absorb hits" or are you going with "like most things in life, if it's extreme in either direction it's not good"?
- if the latter, i already pointed out that the theory is true in extreme cases (e.g. <5% body fat).
- if the former, then you're essentially saying that fat does a better job of asorbing shock than muscle. further, you're saying that someone like lendale white would be less injury prone than brandon jacobs. given your earlier comments about people being too big for their tendons/ligaments, this seems a bit counterintuitive. (also, i would quibble with statements like "made to support" and "naturally designed", but that's a different discussion i really don't feel like getting into.)
also, there are some major problems with causality here:
- brandon jacobs did not get injured in a vaccuum... as an earlier poster stated, he took a helmet to the knee. would a higher body fat percentage have made that injury less likely to occur?
- i assume your argument was more along the lines that a higher body fat percentage would've lessened the damage... but there seems to be an easily slide between "extent of a given injury" and "injury prone in general". honestly, i would say jacobs' upright running style increases his risk of injury far more than his body fat percentage would.
- in other words: i don't know what you would deem to be the proper body fat percentage for jacobs (although i would guess his trainers have that well in hand), but i highly doubt his body fat percentage has any statistically significant bearing on the event of his injury, the extent of the damage given the impact, or on his total recovery time.
sorry i don't have a link, but the burden of proof really isn't on me in this situation... besides, the link switz provided neither proves his theory nor addresses my counterpoint. further, it contains sentences like the following which actually cloud the theory he's trying to purport: "A linebacker needs to have enough body mass (lean and fat weight) to generate high forces and avoid injury."
Last edited by a moderator:
Ned
Footballguy
love your work.Another thing to think about from last week is that apparently Droughns was being looked at for a potential trade. The game was out of the reach to some extent, and the G-men probably wanted to feature him to get more value in a possible deal. That is perhaps why we didn't see more of Jacobs.
As a Jacobs owner, I'm definitely concerned about his lack of durability. A knee here, a stinger there, an ankle... Ward seems like more of a gamer, but maybe that's because he has less ability and more heart.
As a Jacobs owner, I'm definitely concerned about his lack of durability. A knee here, a stinger there, an ankle... Ward seems like more of a gamer, but maybe that's because he has less ability and more heart.
