PDA

View Full Version : Why no faith in Scott or Ware?



VBGiantsFan
04-27-2012, 12:54 AM
I thought the FO was very high on Scott and Ware has proven to be an effective 3rd down back, and pass catcher and blocker.

I thought we'd go guard or tackle. Some good ones were left on the board

buddy33
04-27-2012, 12:56 AM
Who do they have at RB? They lost Jacobs, Bradshaw has bad feet, Brown will miss some time due to suspension and may be cut, I don't see Ware a s a full time RB, and Scott has tools but is unproven.

bflo23
04-27-2012, 12:57 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.

VBGiantsFan
04-27-2012, 12:59 AM
Who do they have at RB? They lost Jacobs, Bradshaw has bad feet, Brown will miss some time due to suspension and may be cut, I don't see Ware a s a full time RB, and Scott has tools but is unproven.

But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

CDN_G-FAN
04-27-2012, 12:59 AM
year after year this FO takes who they think is the best available, and we continue to ask why they do it (including me sometimes).


i do finally get it.


they want the best football players on the team. period.


i have no doubt that they think they got the best football player left on the board.

BlueSanta
04-27-2012, 01:03 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.

DownWitJPP
04-27-2012, 01:05 AM
i think they might be thinking of Bradshaws replacement of the future, not necessarily Scott.

I love AB, but his feet are really bad

buddy33
04-27-2012, 01:10 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.


Scott does have that type of speed.

VBGiantsFan
04-27-2012, 01:13 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

PIERCEnumber58rules
04-27-2012, 01:18 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.


Scott does have that type of speed.

Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster.

dave56dj
04-27-2012, 01:27 AM
The giants have used a two headed and at times
a three headed backfield for years now- so to call him a backup is unfair. AB is a very good running back but no one would argue he has had trouble staying healthy. So not only could he get 10-12 carries and receptions out of backfield if AB is healthy all year (which hasn't happened) he could also grab much more if injuries occur - this is once he picks up playbook and becomes a better pass blocker.

Why no trust in Scott? that tends to be the case with a seventh rounder who lost his starting spot in college. AB was a 7th rounder too but he is the exception not the rule. Scott impressed fans with speed the giants have never said they are ready to give him anything- and quite frankly it seems odd for anyone to trist a 7 rounder who saw almost no
Action as a rookie-Tim biakabatula was fast too. Wilson just adds to
An already potent offense and unlike my man jacobs he can and will have to open up holes for himself

DVision
04-27-2012, 01:31 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.


Scott does have that type of speed.

Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster.

OK now find some film of Scott breaking tackles and making people miss. Good luck with that.

DVision
04-27-2012, 01:34 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

If you haven't noticed Bradshaw can't make it through a season. I see your another person enamored with the word "starter".

Did you think Prince was gonna start last season? And if he only played nickel it would have been a wasted 1st round pick?

repeatchamps
04-27-2012, 01:35 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.
Scott does have that type of speed. Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster. OK now find some film of Scott breaking tackles and making people miss. Good luck with that.</P>


This!</P>


I agree 100%.When did Scott in college ever log the numbers in one season that Wilson did last yearin all areas of the game (i.e. kick returns, receiving, rushing) at a school like VA Tech? Answer=never.</P>

bflo23
04-27-2012, 01:37 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.


Scott does have that type of speed.

Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster.

Scott's faster that one specific day.... Wilson was clocked at as fast as 4.29 in 2009 and 2010.

JMFP2
04-27-2012, 01:37 AM
I see Bradshaw, Wilson, and Scott as the three main guys.</P>


I think Scott has a lot of potential....Ware is Ware....nothing wrong with him at all.</P>

VBGiantsFan
04-27-2012, 01:41 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

If you haven't noticed Bradshaw can't make it through a season. I see your another person enamored with the word "starter".

Did you think Prince was gonna start last season? And if he only played nickel it would have been a wasted 1st round pick?

Considering we have Bradshaw, Scott, and Ware, all very capable backs, I don't see why a first rounder was necessary for a RB, especially one that is NOT the starter, and may not even make the 1st back up role.

Prince was different because he was graded so far and above everyone else left on the board. He was a top 10 projection. He was the FAR greater talent than anything at that draft position. He unexpectedly fell to the Giants.

Wilson was never rated as a 1st round pick and was rated the 3rd best RB in the draft. Considering the talent at OL who was rated similarly if not better than Wilson, there is NO comparison between the 2 picks.

idiotekniQues
04-27-2012, 02:13 AM
all you hear about wilson is 'hit and still running.'

kid has game.

PIERCEnumber58rules
04-27-2012, 02:13 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.
Scott does have that type of speed. Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster. OK now find some film of Scott breaking tackles and making people miss. Good luck with that.</P>


This!</P>


I agree 100%.*When did Scott in college ever log the numbers in one season that Wilson did last year*in all areas of the game (i.e. kick returns, receiving, rushing) at a school like VA Tech? Answer=never.</P>

LOL, tell us how you really feel about Scott. He actually had some good tape. Do a YouTube search. There is a reason JR drafted him.

BlueBlooded1979
04-27-2012, 02:17 AM
A RB in the first round needs to be a starter or at least get 20 carries a game. Fumbles Wilson isn't anywhere near that this year and thus a wasted first round pick.

Nickel CB is on the field 40%-60% of the time. A first round pick is completely justified. Prince was the #2 CB on the board and had top 10 value.

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:20 AM
Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.

Scott does.

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:21 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.
SO, because he won't get the nod over AB this year that means he's a consensus backup? Interesting.

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:23 AM
The giants have used a two headed and at times
a three headed backfield for years now- so to call him a backup is unfair. AB is a very good running back but no one would argue he has had trouble staying healthy. So not only could he get 10-12 carries and receptions out of backfield if AB is healthy all year (which hasn't happened) he could also grab much more if injuries occur - this is once he picks up playbook and becomes a better pass blocker.

Why no trust in Scott? that tends to be the case with a seventh rounder who lost his starting spot in college. AB was a 7th rounder too but he is the exception not the rule. Scott impressed fans with speed the giants have never said they are ready to give him anything- and quite frankly it seems odd for anyone to trist a 7 rounder who saw almost no
Action as a rookie-Tim biakabatula was fast too. Wilson just adds to
An already potent offense and unlike my man jacobs he can and will have to open up holes for himself
AB's stock also dropped because of the trouble he got into in college. I want to say he had a 4th round grade on him before the outside stuff held sway.

BlueSanta
04-27-2012, 02:24 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

Could you provide a link to show me all these consensus opinions that he is a backup? Do you understand the meaning of the word "consensus?"

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:25 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

If you haven't noticed Bradshaw can't make it through a season. I see your another person enamored with the word "starter".

Did you think Prince was gonna start last season? And if he only played nickel it would have been a wasted 1st round pick?

Considering we have Bradshaw, Scott, and Ware, all very capable backs, I don't see why a first rounder was necessary for a RB, especially one that is NOT the starter, and may not even make the 1st back up role.

Prince was different because he was graded so far and above everyone else left on the board. He was a top 10 projection. He was the FAR greater talent than anything at that draft position. He unexpectedly fell to the Giants.

Wilson was never rated as a 1st round pick and was rated the 3rd best RB in the draft. Considering the talent at OL who was rated similarly if not better than Wilson, there is NO comparison between the 2 picks.
Do you base all rookies on their roles their first year? Damn, the Eli Manning kid really sucks.

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:25 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

Could you provide a link to show me all these consensus opinions that he is a backup? Do you understand the meaning of the word "consensus?"

Yes. It means all of his personalities agree.

Drez
04-27-2012, 02:26 AM
A RB in the first round needs to be a starter or at least get 20 carries a game. Fumbles Wilson isn't anywhere near that this year and thus a wasted first round pick.

Nickel CB is on the field 40%-60% of the time. A first round pick is completely justified. Prince was the #2 CB on the board and had top 10 value.
A RB taken in the top 15 or so needs to get 20 carries a game. A RB taken at 32, not so much.

slipknottin
04-27-2012, 02:27 AM
Ware has had a ton of opportunities, continues to do pretty much nothing.

Scott I think has some upside, I think he may find himself on the field a bit too if he puts in the work.

egyptian420
04-27-2012, 02:33 AM
So many people hate this pic....reminds me of the JPP pick who I myself disliked.....time after time Reese has proven himself so I'm definitely fine with this pick

I personally wanted D. Martin but I guess we'll see how they both turn out, glad we got a RB though

There's still a ton of value for OL in the second round

myles2424
04-27-2012, 02:42 AM
A RB in the first round needs to be a starter or at least get 20 carries a game. Fumbles Wilson isn't anywhere near that this year and thus a wasted first round pick.

Nickel CB is on the field 40%-60% of the time. A first round pick is completely justified. Prince was the #2 CB on the board and had top 10 value.
Scott is unproven, ware is extremely average & Bradshaw is guaranteed to be hurt at some point this season.....
I guess somebody should've let J.R know he just wasted a pick because we have such amazing RBs that Wilson has no place on this team....

DVision
04-27-2012, 02:45 AM
Nobody thought those guys were any good. Do you remember them doing anything good? They go down from the 1st defender touching them and they don't have much speed.

Do they have 4.3 speed like David Wilson? No. Wilson looks like beast with speed and power.
Scott does have that type of speed. Scott: 4.34 combine. Wilson: 4.49. Scott's faster. OK now find some film of Scott breaking tackles and making people miss. Good luck with that.</P>


This!</P>


I agree 100%.*When did Scott in college ever log the numbers in one season that Wilson did last year*in all areas of the game (i.e. kick returns, receiving, rushing) at a school like VA Tech? Answer=never.</P>

LOL, tell us how you really feel about Scott. He actually had some good tape. Do a YouTube search. There is a reason JR drafted him.

Yeah there's a reason he was a projected 6 - 7 round draft pick and we picked him up in the 7th! And please don't compare him to Bradshaw, because he slipped due to off the field issues. Bradshaw's last season at Marshall he had over 1500 yds rushing, a 6.1 avg and 19 rushing TD's.

Pre draft analysis on Scott: Has trouble making his own yards. Lacks vision. Needs play to be blocked up perfectly. Runs small. Doesn’t run with authority picks his way and dances too much. Only average footwork, change of direction and lateral agility. Has had durability and ball security issues. Offers little as a blocker. Poor production.

Now again, I challenge you to show me that film.

DVision
04-27-2012, 02:48 AM
But to spend a 1st round pick on a consensus back up RB doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The RB failure last year was blamed primarily on the O-line, and there was a chance to draft improvement at this pick and they didn't do it.

I'm not saying Wilson isn't good, I just don't understand the pick for the Giants.

When you call a guy "a consensus backup" who isnt 1, people stop reading and move on. Like me.




You're right, he was drafted to take over the starter spot from bradshaw this year. My mistake. Feel free to not respond to me in the future.

If you haven't noticed Bradshaw can't make it through a season. I see your another person enamored with the word "starter".

Did you think Prince was gonna start last season? And if he only played nickel it would have been a wasted 1st round pick?

Considering we have Bradshaw, Scott, and Ware, all very capable backs, I don't see why a first rounder was necessary for a RB, especially one that is NOT the starter, and may not even make the 1st back up role.

Prince was different because he was graded so far and above everyone else left on the board. He was a top 10 projection. He was the FAR greater talent than anything at that draft position. He unexpectedly fell to the Giants.

Wilson was never rated as a 1st round pick and was rated the 3rd best RB in the draft. Considering the talent at OL who was rated similarly if not better than Wilson, there is NO comparison between the 2 picks.

Scott and Ware haven't done a thing in the NFL. What makes you think they're so capable?

And who rated Wilson the 3rd best back? Do they work for the Giants?

slipknottin
04-27-2012, 03:04 AM
Wilson was never rated as a 1st round pick and was rated the 3rd best RB in the draft. Considering the talent at OL who was rated similarly if not better than Wilson, there is NO comparison between the 2 picks.

Giants had wilson as the 2nd rated back. Thought most of the talent at HB would be gone by their 2nd round pick, took the best HB they could when they had the opportunity.

embeshAtYa
04-27-2012, 11:06 AM
Dan Ware is lucky he knows his assignments