THE UNDERCOVER BROTHA
Footballguy
i have him and dont have Tiki.....so whats his value?
Last edited by a moderator:
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!
[DYNASTY] RB Brandon Jacobs (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter THE UNDERCOVER BROTHA
- Start date
his value is "off" right now. I believe Ward played better than him last year. Stats only show a small difference but IMO when they wanted a 3rd and 1 back, Ward came thru more than Jacobs in 05. I don't see many FFers noticing Ward so that's why I think Jacob's value is "off".
I'm sure the G-men's plan was/is to have Jacobs be the bruising back or "thunder" but if he can't soundly beat out Ward it's gotta make ya think. ETA both only got about 100-130 yards for the year last year
I heard an interview with Tiki where the guy interviewing joked that they were looking to get a replacement for he and Amani in this year's draft. He agreed it's likely but was also laughing. After the interview, the guy thought if Maurice Drew was there, he was a lock to be a Giant otherwise they go LBer or T best available.
Too much laughter and one interviewer's opinion to take anything to heart
I'm sure the G-men's plan was/is to have Jacobs be the bruising back or "thunder" but if he can't soundly beat out Ward it's gotta make ya think. ETA both only got about 100-130 yards for the year last year
I heard an interview with Tiki where the guy interviewing joked that they were looking to get a replacement for he and Amani in this year's draft. He agreed it's likely but was also laughing. After the interview, the guy thought if Maurice Drew was there, he was a lock to be a Giant otherwise they go LBer or T best available.
Too much laughter and one interviewer's opinion to take anything to heart
Last edited by a moderator:
aussiehockeyfan
Footballguy
A slightly better version of Duckett. And that's not a compliment.
I would say that at best, he's an "unplayable RBBCer". At worst (other than completely sucking), is being a goaline/short yardage back.
I would say that at best, he's an "unplayable RBBCer". At worst (other than completely sucking), is being a goaline/short yardage back.
Last edited by a moderator:
What's not to like? He's got very good speed - especially nice in combination with his size. He has good hands & he's very productive in short yardage/goal line situations. Hard to bring down - I could really see him excelling as Barber gives way.
Full disclosure - Jacobs owner in a dynasty league
Full disclosure - Jacobs owner in a dynasty league
Avery
Footballguy
I believe that comparisons to Duckett come from comparing measurables, like size, and not the players. Jacobs has suprising speed and good hands for a big guy. Last year, his rookie year, although he was a short-yardage back, he has a tendency to get too upright when he runs, something he is apparently working on.FWIW, he is competing with E. Manning for the player who has spent the most time watching film in the off-season. A solid work ethic with his measurables could lead to a productive NFL back. As for opportunity, Tiki can't keep ticking forever.
Since he is 2nd/3rd on the depth chart now, he's definitely a 'hold' with potential since he won't get much in any sort of trade right now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Liquid Tension
Footballguy
Not an owner of Jacobs, but my review of him is mixed. His main issue is that he is tall and runs too upright, but he adjusted some later in the year. The truth is that he was never given an opportunity to be in the game when the defense didn't know what was coming. Only slight hyperbole...every time he came in it was short yardage and he got the ball. The defense knew it was coming and they still gave him the ball. I thought Ward showed some good things, but the comparison of the two by someone previously is not comparing apples to apples. Ward was in the game to give Tiki a blow and nobody expected him to get the ball. It would be interesting to see if Jacobs were in the game for a series and they gave him the ball on a 1st and 10 or 2nd and 7. He has yet to play anything other than the short yardage specialist. In dynasty leagues, I think he is a hold for now, even though I am not a fan of such tall runners
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
The general concensus is that Brandon Jacobs runs too upright, and he's a goal line / short yardage back and little more.
At least, that was the role (and opportunities) that was afforded to him by the Giants.
He was hit or miss, picking up first downs on half of his runs, but his carries for zero yards (including 3 in a row against Philly in Week 11 on first and goal at the 1) were more memorable than his 3rd and 2 first down pickups.
Comparing him to Alstott, he did convert as well if not better on short yardage. However, Jacobs brings little else to the table - he had zero targets as a receiver.
At least, that was the role (and opportunities) that was afforded to him by the Giants.
He was hit or miss, picking up first downs on half of his runs, but his carries for zero yards (including 3 in a row against Philly in Week 11 on first and goal at the 1) were more memorable than his 3rd and 2 first down pickups.
Comparing him to Alstott, he did convert as well if not better on short yardage. However, Jacobs brings little else to the table - he had zero targets as a receiver.
Avery
Footballguy
That "general consensus" comes from people with little knowledge of the player and are only looking at the stats.Jacobs was stuck behind Cadillac and Ronnie Brown at Auburn and thus transfered to S. Illinois. Sure he ran too upright his rookie year and did not catch a pass. If you look beyond the numbers, he is working hard at running at more of an angle, and although he showed good hands in camp, he did not catch a pass because:
1. He is not a great blocker
2. Some guy named Tiki is in at RB for most passing downs.
I'm not saying he is a future hall of famer, but to judge him based on his rookie year stats alone is not looking deep enough into the player. This is about finding potential in future dynasty players and given his speed, agility and quickness for a man his size, plus the fact that the starting RB on the Giants is on the wrong side of 30, he is a good guy to keep an eye on.
Last edited by a moderator:
No he is not. Goalline yes but short yardage(anywhere else) no way.Ward had 35 carries for 123 yardsJacobs had 38 for 99 yards.Jacobs should have had 65 carries or so but Coughlin went with the other bruising type back, Ward. If that doesn't concern a Jacobs owner I don't know what would. It certainly wasn't because Jacobs was tired and needed a breather.
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, let's qualify those stats a bit. These are according to nfl.comJacobs had 38 carries. Of those 38 carries, 21 were in the red zone and 17 were outside the red zone.
Inside the red zone, Jacobs averaged 1.4 ypc. That doesn't look very good, until you look at the fact that of those 21 carries, he gained 7 TDs and 12 first downs. That means he either scored or kept a drive going on 19 of 21 carries in short yardage sitautions. Now, if 90+% sucess rate inside the red zone for ALL carries in that area isn't being a successful short yardage RB, then I would suggest that perhaps your expectations are a tad high.
Outside the red zone, Jacobs averaged a very solid 4.12 ypc even though some of those carries were very specifically short yardage situations. That's a better ypc than Ward's 3.51 ypc, which he obtained in situations more condusive to larger averages.
So it's pretty obvious for someone even mathematically challenged to see that Jacobs was indeed an extremely successful short yardage RB, and that given his carries he was used for little else othger than short yardage. However, when he was given any kind of chance he accounted pretty well for himself.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bizkiteer
Footballguy
LOL, GB the drunken donkey!!!Okay, let's qualify those stats a bit. These are according to nfl.comJacobs had 38 carries. Of those 38 carries, 21 were in the red zone and 17 were outside the red zone.
Inside the red zone, Jacobs averaged 1.4 ypc. That doesn't look very good, until you look at the fact that of those 21 carries, he gained 7 TDs and 12 first downs. That means he either scored or kept a drive going on 19 of 21 carries in short yardage sitautions. Now, if 90+% sucess rate inside the red zone for ALL carries in that area isn't being a successful short yardage RB, then I would suggest that perhaps your expectations are a tad high.
Outside the red zone, Jacobs averaged a very solid 4.12 ypc even though some of those carries were very specifically short yardage situations. That's a better ypc than Ward's 3.51 ypc, which he obtained in situations more condusive to larger averages.
So it's pretty obvious for someone even mathematically challenged to see that Jacobs was indeed an extremely successful short yardage RB, and that given his carries he was used for little else othger than short yardage. However, when he was given any kind of chance he accounted pretty well for himself.
More than convincing and you can't argue that, unless you JUST look at the stat line like you said. Very well put and gives me more confidence in having him. I'll also add that Coughlin really likes him and they were trying to not overload him. Coughlin is one of those coaches that it's really good to be on his "good" side too.You ignored Ward and the fact that I said he was a good goalline back.Don't insult me by calling me mathematically challenged. I did nothing to deserve that. If I was beaten up in people's sigs I'd change my ways, you haven't. Don't take it out on me.Okay, let's qualify those stats a bit. These are according to nfl.comJacobs had 38 carries. Of those 38 carries, 21 were in the red zone and 17 were outside the red zone.
Inside the red zone, Jacobs averaged 1.4 ypc. That doesn't look very good, until you look at the fact that of those 21 carries, he gained 7 TDs and 12 first downs. That means he either scored or kept a drive going on 19 of 21 carries in short yardage sitautions. Now, if 90+% sucess rate inside the red zone for ALL carries in that area isn't being a successful short yardage RB, then I would suggest that perhaps your expectations are a tad high.
So it's pretty obvious for someone even mathematically challenged to see that Jacobs was indeed an extremely successful short yardage RB, and that given his carries he was used for little else othger than short yardage. However, when he was given any kind of chance he accounted pretty well for himself.
If you can't debate without insulting then I wish you wouldn't come here and as far as I know several people here have the same view regarding people posting insults.
If you can then I'd welcome it because I have enjoyed reading your posts at times over the last year or so.
Honestly, what exactly do you expect when you just throw out number of carries & yards with no reference to a RB's usage whatsoever, and then plainly use those numbers to imply that Ward is a better RB than Jacobs?As far as being beaten up in people's sigs? Who freakin' cares? Is THAT an important stat to you also? I could honestly care less. If someone gets their panties in a wad on a FF board because they get called out for twisting numbers, I'd say that's a problem that they have - geez, this is a board for discussion of football, isn't it? Take off the freakin' skirt, for crissakes.
try again-you reply to a post where I called Jacobs a good goalline back by posting his goalline stats, did you not?
I don't believe I ever "said" Ward was better. I watch the Giants often and Coughlin was clearly upset with Jacobs at times and went to Ward. I will attempt to get some stats to show you
I don't believe I ever "said" Ward was better. I watch the Giants often and Coughlin was clearly upset with Jacobs at times and went to Ward. I will attempt to get some stats to show you
Koya
Footballguy
Giants fan here - the guy is NOT going to be a meaningful NFL RB, and therefore wont be an impact FF player. It is as simple as that.
Yes, he has great speed for a guy his size - but runs too high, and has not shown the ability to be a full time back. Despite his size/weight, he was not especially successful in short yardage at times last year.
He should be a good role player, especially if he works on the short yardage scenario but I don't see the skills in him to be a starting back, or even a meaningful/lead guy in an RBBC.
Yes, he has great speed for a guy his size - but runs too high, and has not shown the ability to be a full time back. Despite his size/weight, he was not especially successful in short yardage at times last year.
He should be a good role player, especially if he works on the short yardage scenario but I don't see the skills in him to be a starting back, or even a meaningful/lead guy in an RBBC.
You posted his 6 yard average between the Giants 21-50 and his redzone stats but not the rest of the field where he averaged .9 and 1.4 yards.
Jacobs
OPP 49-20 - BY YARD LINE 0 7 6 0.9 4 0 1
OPP 19-1 - BY YARD LINE 0 21 29 1.4 5 7 12
Ward
OPP 49-20 - BY YARD LINE 0 10 34 3.4 11 0 1
OPP 19-1 - BY YARD LINE 0 4 11 2.8 7 0 1
I might look for an article or quote from Coughlin later but regardless, how can a coach be completely happy with a RB that has next to no success on half the field?
Jacobs
OPP 49-20 - BY YARD LINE 0 7 6 0.9 4 0 1
OPP 19-1 - BY YARD LINE 0 21 29 1.4 5 7 12
Ward
OPP 49-20 - BY YARD LINE 0 10 34 3.4 11 0 1
OPP 19-1 - BY YARD LINE 0 4 11 2.8 7 0 1
I might look for an article or quote from Coughlin later but regardless, how can a coach be completely happy with a RB that has next to no success on half the field?
No one here is saying that Jacobs will be the next Priest Holmes. However, to judge him strictly based upon his workload & circumstances in his rookie year, using only the regular season carries, is using a very limited & constricted data set.He may be a bum, for all I know. But I've seen some flashes of brilliance that make me think there's a lot more there than a between-the-tackles style masher & nothing else. That's what makes me keep a guy like him on my dynasty roster while I never even consider adding Ward.
Last edited by a moderator:
remote controller
Footballguy
I own him. I like his potential, and his work ethic. He is a definite "hold" right now. He will get a chance somewhere over the next 2 to 3 years, sooner if Tiki goes down.
Last edited by a moderator:
I own him in a keeper league, but will be cutting him loose. He may get a chance, but Tiki shows no signs of slowing down and Jacobs may not be viewed by the Giants as a viable successor. Jacobs is good in a TD only league, but in performance leagues, he is not worth the wait IMO. There are better "upside" candidates out there like Michael Turner who ARE worth the wait.
The question of Jacobs' value is locked up in the issue of Barber's durability. It actually reminds me of the Curtis Martin/Lamont Jordan situation in NY. Jacobs is a first-day pick who is faster than expected and with better hands too. He's been pigeonholed into the short-yardage role b/c it's the only job that Barber isn't freakin' awesome at. Jacobs has been pretty good in that role, but better earlier in the season than later, from what I recall. Jacobs also looked great in the preseason, where he got to run in many different situations.
If Barber keeps on being healthy and productive, Jacobs will not find many opportunities, and will not become anything for at least three years. If Barber starts breaking down though, Jacobs will be the immediate beneficiary, and could potentially hang on to the starting job.
If Barber keeps on being healthy and productive, Jacobs will not find many opportunities, and will not become anything for at least three years. If Barber starts breaking down though, Jacobs will be the immediate beneficiary, and could potentially hang on to the starting job.
Foosball God
Foos
LOL @ trying to turn this into a respect debate now that you've beenYou ignored Ward and the fact that I said he was a good goalline back.Don't insult me by calling me mathematically challenged. I did nothing to deserve that. If I was beaten up in people's sigs I'd change my ways, you haven't. Don't take it out on me.Okay, let's qualify those stats a bit. These are according to nfl.comJacobs had 38 carries. Of those 38 carries, 21 were in the red zone and 17 were outside the red zone.
Inside the red zone, Jacobs averaged 1.4 ypc. That doesn't look very good, until you look at the fact that of those 21 carries, he gained 7 TDs and 12 first downs. That means he either scored or kept a drive going on 19 of 21 carries in short yardage sitautions. Now, if 90+% sucess rate inside the red zone for ALL carries in that area isn't being a successful short yardage RB, then I would suggest that perhaps your expectations are a tad high.
So it's pretty obvious for someone even mathematically challenged to see that Jacobs was indeed an extremely successful short yardage RB, and that given his carries he was used for little else othger than short yardage. However, when he was given any kind of chance he accounted pretty well for himself.
If you can't debate without insulting then I wish you wouldn't come here and as far as I know several people here have the same view regarding people posting insults.
If you can then I'd welcome it because I have enjoyed reading your posts at times over the last year or so.
He had 2 catches for 13 yards in preseason last year. SO who didn't see him play in preseason?You obviously didn't see him play in the preseason last year. The only way I can understand your comments is that you have not seen him play much at all either in college or in the pros and are basing your comments only on his stats from last year's regular season.
Last edited by a moderator:
http://footballguys.com/JacoBr00-1.phpWeek 6 at DAL - The Giants brought Jacobs in late in the fourth quarter for a second and one carry at the Dallas three yard line. Jacobs gained two yards before being stripped by Roy Williams. Jacobs did not get another opportunity.
Week 7 vs DEN - Jacobs’ name isn’t here for what he did, but rather for what he did not do. That is, he did not touch the football once all game long. Jacobs had a costly fumble at the goal line last week, and the New York media skewered HC Tom Coughlin for his decision to go with Jacobs rather than the veteran Barber. It’s doubtful that Coughlin kept Jacobs on the sidelines to appease the New York Post, but it was somewhat telling that Jacobs didn’t see any touches one week after such a big negative.
Week 11 vs PHI - Jacobs is supposed to be the goal line specialist for the Giants. HC Tom Coughlin may want to revisit that decision, as Jacobs was brought into the game with New York facing a first and goal from the one yard line. Jacobs ran the ball straight up the middle three times, and every time he failed to gain a yard. Jacobs appears to run too upright and is not taking advantage of his size or power. On all three carries he was met at the line and stopped dead in his tracks.
The three goal line carries were the only opportunities that Jacobs had to touch the ball in Week 11.
Week 14 at PHI - Jacobs had only two carries in the game, on successive goal line attempts. He failed to find the end zone on either play. On the second attempt, it appeared as if he scored a touchdown, but the officials ruled otherwise. The play was challenged, but the call on the field was upheld. Notably, after failing to penetrate the end zone on his two tries, Jacobs was not seen on the field again.
Week 16 at WAS - Jacobs’ only rush came on the final play of the game.
houndirish
Footballguy
Giants fan and a Jacobs owner in Dynasty. It's too soon to stamp a grade, positive or negative, on Jacobs. All the points Liquid makes above are spot on. I'd also add that Jacobs seems like the type of back who benefits with additional carries. He's not a lightning in a bottle type. It might take him 7-8 carries to really hit his stride. That's not going to happen with a healthy Tiki ahead of him.I'm also not sold on these reports that have the Giants sniffing at RB's on the draft's first day.
SCGiants
Footballguy
I also am a Giants fan and I have to respectfully disagree. As pointed out in an earlier post he was given the ball in situations where EVERYONE knew he was going to get the ball and plow through the middle. Even with defenses knowing this he was highly successful. If given the chance (which he was not) to be in the series other than third and short or goal-line situations he very well may be a good NFL RB. Though speaking for fantasy purposes as long as Barber is healthy Jacobs will remain in his short yardage role imo. If you are in a TD heavy league and have the room I would keep him. At least keep him through the season to see if TC utilizes him more now that he isn't a rookie and should have a better grasp on the playbook etc. If he can prove that he is of starting RB quality then the Giants will have one helluva beast as a RB that will wear defenses down by halftime.
UnknownCoach
Footballguy
I dont agree. The only time they really passed up a featured RB was in round 1 with Williams available but they got a huge offer from Pittsburg that moved the Giants to the very end of the round. The only guy left worth drafting with their next two picks was White who they should have passed on. White is another 250 pounder likely RBBC back like Dayne or Jacobs but more like Dayne in that Jacobs is pure muscle. They dont need another 250 pound RBBC back, they need a featured back. By the time their third round pick came around, all 3 remaining first day backs (who are all undersized anyway) were gone. So other than accepting a big offer to move down and then passing on White twice, they werent taking passes on first day RBs. The only factor Jacobs may or may not have played is in the decision to pass on White. A lot of teams passed on White and I'm sure fans wouldnt have been happy if the Giants did pick him. I'm surprised they passed on Williams but Pittsburg really wanted to jump in front of Chicago. I dont think that had anything to do with Jacobs at all. Jacobs isnt the future. The only value Jacobs has IMO is as a backup to a 31yo. Though its likely to be RBBC if Tiki is hurt this year. Both the Jets and Giants will address RB again next year. As their late round selections and current group of backups are all sub starter material.
Koya
Footballguy
Neither here nor there. RB is a position where you can draft a guy in the top 2 rounds and he should contribute immediately, so there was no pressing need to use a pick there - Jacobs certainly plays into the equation too.While I hope he can be a full time back, like many others I have doubts. Another year to give him a chance and if we need a RB next year, that is one of the easier positions to fill for immediate need.
