PDA

View Full Version : Bear Pascoe Will Re-sign With Giants Next Week



RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 07:56 AM
http://www.giants101.com/2013/01/26/bear-pascoe-will-re-sign-with-new-york-giants-next-week/

Excerpt: "Tight end Bear Pascoe (http://www.giants101.com/tag/bear-pascoe/) is one of 26 pending free agents (http://www.giants101.com/2013/01/02/new-york-giants-2013-free-agent-list/) for the New York Giants (http://www.giants101.com/tag/new-york-giants/), and likely one of the first whom will have a contract signed prior to the start of NFL (http://www.giants101.com/tag/nfl/) free agency in March.

The Porterville Recorder reports (http://www.recorderonline.com/news/giants-55680-pascoe-sign.html) that Pascoe, who is slated to become a restricted free agent (RFA), will re-sign with the Giants sometime next week. This news comes by way of Sean Pascoe, Bear's Father, who informed the paper of the pending one-year agreement.

“I don’t think he’ll be getting what they were hoping,” Sean said (http://www.recordersports.com/articles/pascoe-4115-season-bear.html). “At least he’s got a job, that’s the main thing.”


Pascoe's Father said the contract will likely be in the range of the league minimum, which would be somewhere around $600,000 based on Bear's NFL (http://www.giants101.com/tag/nfl/) experience." Read more..

GameTime
01-26-2013, 07:58 AM
I am happy to se Bear back on theteam. Although I had much higher hopes for him he is a solid player and does what they want him to do.
If his contract is around league minimum then that is about right IMO.

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 08:05 AM
I am happy to se Bear back on theteam. Although I had much higher hopes for him he is a solid player and does what they want him to do.
If his contract is around league minimum then that is about right IMO.

And apparently only for one year which makes me think they want one more transition season for Robinson

TCHOF
01-26-2013, 08:09 AM
And apparently only for one year which makes me think they want one more transition season for Robinson

. . . or it could mean that they don't think that they can or will resign Bennett.

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 09:49 AM
. . . or it could mean that they don't think that they can or will resign Bennett.


I don't think that's the case. They carry three tight ends and Pascoe does well enough.

jomo
01-26-2013, 10:12 AM
I don't think that's the case. They carry three tight ends and Pascoe does well enough.League minimum for a guy who's been durable, serviceable and knows the system is a good deal. Book it JR!

river555
01-26-2013, 10:40 AM
Great. They guy has been solid. Obviously not a super star but not every player can be or needs to be a super star. He's one of those guys that has a role on the team and he does very well...blocks well, smart player, backup FB,

Captain Chaos
01-26-2013, 11:06 AM
Bear is a good value, not a great receiver but knows the scheme and how to block!

Carter.525
01-26-2013, 11:26 AM
it would be a good, cheap signing.. now resign the Unicorn

Bennett / Bear / Robinson

Toadofsteel
01-26-2013, 11:30 AM
I have a feeling that Bear is going to be our 3TE. JR loves having reliable backups around like Bear or Hixon, folks that know the system. Hell, it's why we extended Diehl, and still have Carr around, even though both have declined below NFL playing ability...

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 11:32 AM
Great. They guy has been solid. Obviously not a super star but not every player can be or needs to be a super star. He's one of those guys that has a role on the team and he does very well...blocks well, smart player, backup FB,

His versatility is a big factor

drewz
01-26-2013, 12:26 PM
I don't hate this move as long as Martellus Bennett is resigned

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 12:49 PM
I don't hate this move as long as Martellus Bennett is resigned

It has nothing to do with Bennett. Pascoe had done whatever they've asked, he's versatile and durable. Vet minimum is a really good deal.

GIANTSACK
01-26-2013, 01:06 PM
It has nothing to do with Bennett. Pascoe had done whatever they've asked, he's versatile and durable. Vet minimum is a really good deal.




how can we get ballard back? we really miss him last yr. bennet was good but ballard always made those tuff crucial cath t keep the drive going. it seem like bennet drop the 3rd down balls. th superbowl rub. ballard made some sick catches that save our season

GameTime
01-26-2013, 01:32 PM
how can we get ballard back? we really miss him last yr. bennet was good but ballard always made those tuff crucial cath t keep the drive going. it seem like bennet drop the 3rd down balls. th superbowl rub. ballard made some sick catches that save our season

Bennet is a better all around TE then Ballard and is not coming off an ACL. I like Ballard but Bennet is better. Siging Pascoe has nothing to do with Bennet. they are asked to do two different things on the Giants.

jomo
01-26-2013, 01:37 PM
It has nothing to do with Bennett. Pascoe had done whatever they've asked, he's versatile and durable. Vet minimum is a really good deal.Agreed, it has nothing to do with Bennett. We have an entire roster to fill not just starters and Bear represents a very good value for us at the vet minimum.

BigBlueAllDay
01-26-2013, 01:41 PM
Bear Pascoe for vet minimum for a year is a great deal. Something we can all agree on.

GameTime
01-26-2013, 01:42 PM
Agreed, it has nothing to do with Bennett. We have an entire roster to fill not just starters and Bear represents a very good value for us at the vet minimum.
Its great for Bear too because he prob couldn't do any better any where else. That is not a dig on him at all either. Its the niche he has made for himself on the Giants.

Spytheweb
01-26-2013, 02:20 PM
Good news, he's hard working and steady like Blackburn.

TheShouldersOf
01-26-2013, 03:19 PM
not a Pascoe fan, was hoping that the Unicorn and Robinson would be pulling the Tight end positions in games,

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 03:21 PM
how can we get ballard back? we really miss him last yr. bennet was good but ballard always made those tuff crucial cath t keep the drive going. it seem like bennet drop the 3rd down balls. th superbowl rub. ballard made some sick catches that save our season

Why do we want Ballard back? He's had a lisfranc fracture, like Steve Smith and hasn't taken a snap since. Bennett's numbers (2012) were at least as good as Ballard's (2011).

Bennett




RECEIVING



Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2012
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
16
55
626
11.4
39.1
33T
5
7
0
35
0



Ballard




RECEIVING




Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2011
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
14
38
604
15.9
43.1
41
4
13
1
31
0

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 03:21 PM
Its great for Bear too because he prob couldn't do any better any where else. That is not a dig on him at all either. Its the niche he has made for himself on the Giants.

+1

Giantslb66
01-26-2013, 04:21 PM
This is as exciting as resigning Kregg Lumpkin!

drewz
01-26-2013, 04:58 PM
It has nothing to do with Bennett. Pascoe had done whatever they've asked, he's versatile and durable. Vet minimum is a really good deal.

I never said it has anything to with Bennett. I just said I don't hate the move as long as they keep Bennett

NorwoodBlue
01-26-2013, 05:06 PM
I'm about as indifferent to this reported signing as I could possibly be. Bear has been an unqualified OK player for a while now; but it doesn't improve the team in any real way. We've made huge strides in resigning "average"; but, Bear wasn't a huge concern. He could have been replaced if necessary. That's probably why he's back at vet min. It's like resigning Barden, it really doesn't matter.

GameTime
01-26-2013, 05:40 PM
I'm about as indifferent to this reported signing as I could possibly be. Bear has been an unqualified OK player for a while now; but it doesn't improve the team in any real way. We've made huge strides in resigning "average"; but, Bear wasn't a huge concern. He could have been replaced if necessary. That's probably why he's back at vet min. It's like resigning Barden, it really doesn't matter.
if you think Pascoe means the same to the team as Barden then you have never watched one Giants football game....

NorwoodBlue
01-26-2013, 05:45 PM
if you think Pascoe means the same to the team as Barden then you have never watched one Giants football game....

Both are easily replacable, that's the point.

GameTime
01-26-2013, 05:47 PM
Both are easily replacable, that's the point.
the point is that Pascoe has been good for the Giants in the role he fills. If they get him for the vet minimum then whats the problem???
Barden has been useless.....

TextureDj
01-26-2013, 06:18 PM
Bennet is a better all around TE then Ballard and is not coming off an ACL. I like Ballard but Bennet is better. Siging Pascoe has nothing to do with Bennet. they are asked to do two different things on the Giants.Bennett also showed serious durability early in the season with that ruptured knee capsule. On many a playerthat would have been a sprain or even a tear. Brutal the way that knee torqued, that is one well built individual.

RoanokeFan
01-26-2013, 07:28 PM
I'm about as indifferent to this reported signing as I could possibly be. Bear has been an unqualified OK player for a while now; but it doesn't improve the team in any real way. We've made huge strides in resigning "average"; but, Bear wasn't a huge concern. He could have been replaced if necessary. That's probably why he's back at vet min. It's like resigning Barden, it really doesn't matter.

You can't equate Barden to Pascoe. Barden has trouble getting on the field unless at least 2 receivers are down. Pascoe is a good player who knows the system and does a decent job. He can also play full back and STs if required.

Diamondring
01-26-2013, 08:39 PM
All players on our team can't be that good or we would be unable to keep them. Pascoe is a good signing and I'm happy.

JJC7301
01-26-2013, 11:22 PM
That's good news -- Bear is a good back-up TE and FB. Good enough to be an affordable and valuable back-up, but never good enough about having to lose him to another team who will make him a starter. I think it's perfect.

Antwuan
01-27-2013, 02:52 AM
Good News!

NorwoodBlue
01-27-2013, 11:24 AM
You can't equate Barden to Pascoe. Barden has trouble getting on the field unless at least 2 receivers are down. Pascoe is a good player who knows the system and does a decent job. He can also play full back and STs if required.

No one is saying Pascoe and Barden are of the same ability. The point is that both are easily replaceable. Pascoe has become a redundancy with the development of Hynoski, and Pascoe's value in the passing game isn't that great. I thought he could have been one of the final cuts at the end of training camp last year. There are many TE out there that could step in and do Pascoe's job. Signing him is fine; but it doesn't make any progress in upgrading the team as a whole. And resigning him doesn't mean he's going to survive training camp in 2013. I would think he's one of the players who'll be on the bubble this year, especialy if Robinson shows some progress. That's all assuming they resign Bennett of course. Maybe they're offering Pascoe a contract so quickly because they might not feel they're in good position to sign Bennett. Without Bennett, I think we've got real problems at TE. Pascoe is certainly not a player who'd scare anyone as a starter. Robinson may not be ready to assume the starter role either. I don't even want to think about that scenario.

GameTime
01-27-2013, 11:34 AM
No one is saying Pascoe and Barden are of the same ability. The point is that both are easily replaceable. Pascoe has become a redundancy with the development of Hynoski, and Pascoe's value in the passing game isn't that great. I thought he could have been one of the final cuts at the end of training camp last year. There are many TE out there that could step in and do Pascoe's job. Signing him is fine; but it doesn't make any progress in upgrading the team as a whole. And resigning him doesn't mean he's going to survive training camp in 2013. I would think he's one of the players who'll be on the bubble this year, especialy if Robinson shows some progress. That's all assuming they resign Bennett of course. Maybe they're offering Pascoe a contract so quickly because they might not feel they're in good position to sign Bennett. Without Bennett, I think we've got real problems at TE. Pascoe is certainly not a player who'd scare anyone as a starter. Robinson may not be ready to assume the starter role either. I don't even want to think about that scenario.
for what ever reason I am a fan of Pascoe. I guess I am waiting for him to turn into a Ballard type payer but I he prob wont. I am still a fan. The FO wouldn't sign him if they didnt think he served a purpose for the team. He is not there be a Bennet. he is thewre for other reasons. Can he be replaced....sure he can but why replace him when he does what they want him to d and he knows the Giants system and is prob happy to be there.....

nycsportzfan
01-27-2013, 09:31 PM
Not a bad guy to have in the stable.. Good depth, can help as a blocker, and surprises sometimes with timely pass catches.. Don't mind having Bear back, at all...

nycsportzfan
01-27-2013, 09:33 PM
for what ever reason I am a fan of Pascoe. I guess I am waiting for him to turn into a Ballard type payer but I he prob wont. I am still a fan. The FO wouldn't sign him if they didnt think he served a purpose for the team. He is not there be a Bennet. he is thewre for other reasons. Can he be replaced....sure he can but why replace him when he does what they want him to d and he knows the Giants system and is prob happy to be there..... The thing is, he can be replaced, but whoever replaces him, runs the risk of not being as good a player, and for the price, u know u got someone who can come up with the timely catch, isn't afraid of the moment, and knows the system, which equals, not bad..

RoanokeFan
01-27-2013, 09:40 PM
No one is saying Pascoe and Barden are of the same ability. The point is that both are easily replaceable. Pascoe has become a redundancy with the development of Hynoski, and Pascoe's value in the passing game isn't that great. I thought he could have been one of the final cuts at the end of training camp last year. There are many TE out there that could step in and do Pascoe's job. Signing him is fine; but it doesn't make any progress in upgrading the team as a whole. And resigning him doesn't mean he's going to survive training camp in 2013. I would think he's one of the players who'll be on the bubble this year, especialy if Robinson shows some progress. That's all assuming they resign Bennett of course. Maybe they're offering Pascoe a contract so quickly because they might not feel they're in good position to sign Bennett. Without Bennett, I think we've got real problems at TE. Pascoe is certainly not a player who'd scare anyone as a starter. Robinson may not be ready to assume the starter role either. I don't even want to think about that scenario.

If Hynoski goes down for any appreciable time, Pascoe is the only back up. That is not redundancy, it's insurance and at a very reasonable price. Bennett will get signed or not whether Pascoe is here or not.

GameTime
01-28-2013, 10:23 AM
The thing is, he can be replaced, but whoever replaces him, runs the risk of not being as good a player, and for the price, u know u got someone who can come up with the timely catch, isn't afraid of the moment, and knows the system, which equals, not bad..
exactly why they shoud keep him....annd will keep him

BigBlue1971
01-28-2013, 10:40 AM
Pascoes signing is good news! a great blocker for our backs!

Pascoe will occasionally make teams pay for mistakes thinking hes only a blocker!

Redeyejedi
01-28-2013, 11:00 AM
[QUOTE=RoanokeFan;670873]Why do we want Ballard back? He's had a lisfranc fracture, like Steve Smith and hasn't taken a snap since. Bennett's numbers (2012) were at least as good as Ballard's (2011).

Bennett




RECEIVING



Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2012
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
16
55
626
11.4
39.1
33T
5
7
0
35
0



Ballard




RECEIVING




Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2011
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
14
38
604
15.9
43.1
41
4
13
1
31
0

[/QUOTE U have to remember at the start of the season no 1 was covering Ballard. Defnses showed him basically no respect. Once Defenses saw he could hurt him his numbers dropped. First 6 games I think it was he led the NFL in catch percentage I wrote an article on it

Redeyejedi
01-28-2013, 11:00 AM
[QUOTE=RoanokeFan;670873]Why do we want Ballard back? He's had a lisfranc fracture, like Steve Smith and hasn't taken a snap since. Bennett's numbers (2012) were at least as good as Ballard's (2011).

Bennett




RECEIVING



Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2012
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
16
55
626
11.4
39.1
33T
5
7
0
35
0



Ballard




RECEIVING




Year
Team
G
Rec
Yds
Avg
Yds/G
Lng
TD
20+
40+
1st
FUM


2011
New York Giants (http://www.nfl.com/teams/newyorkgiants/profile?team=NYG)
14
38
604
15.9
43.1
41
4
13
1
31
0

[/QUOTE U have to remember at the start of the season no 1 was covering Ballard. Defenses showed him basically no respect. Once Defenses saw he could hurt him his numbers dropped. First 6 games I think it was he led the NFL in catch percentage I wrote an article on it