PDA

View Full Version : Bring Back Jacobs



NYGiantsFan56
02-06-2013, 06:49 PM
If Reese was smart I sign Jacobs right now. Can get him for Veteran Minimum and be a good back up to Brown and Wilson. The guy has fresh legs and he has chip on his shoulder. Didn't play all last year. Should have eneough in the tank and would shore up RB position for a cheap cost.

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 06:50 PM
If Reese was smart I sign Jacobs right now. can get him for Veteran minimum and be a ggod back up to Brown and Wilson. The guy has fresh legs and he has chip on his shoulder. Didn't play all last year. Should have eneough in the tank and would shore up RB position for a cheap cost.

Makes alot more sense than keeping Lumpkin, that's fo sho.

StraightCruzinn
02-06-2013, 06:51 PM
Got a nice 1 year rest. Maybe a little fresh legs.

NYGiantsFan56
02-06-2013, 06:52 PM
My point exactly. He will come cheap and knows the system and he CAN BLOCK. we need to use money elsewhere. He will save us $$$$$$$$$

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 06:52 PM
All season everyone complains that Wilson doesnt get enough carries.

Now he is the starter and everyone wants the giants to bring in every other HB to take carries from him.

Why not let Wilson and Brown do their thing with Scott as the #3. If they find a nice back later in the draft maybe they grab one.

But there is no need to be paying Jacobs a mil a season to be the #4.

NYGiantsFan56
02-06-2013, 06:53 PM
All season everyone complains that Wilson doesnt get enough carries.

Now he is the starter and everyone wants the giants to bring in every other HB to take carries from him.

Why not let Wilson and Brown do their thing with Scott as the #3. If they find a nice back later in the draft maybe they grab one.

But there is no need to be paying Jacobs a mil a season to be the #4.
Just want him for backup and situational plays. He would come cheap

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 06:54 PM
Just want him for backup and situational plays. He would come cheap

He would be at least a mil a year. Thats the vet minimum. Thats not cheap.

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 06:55 PM
All season everyone complains that Wilson doesnt get enough carries.

Now he is the starter and everyone wants the giants to bring in every other HB to take carries from him.

Why not let Wilson and Brown do their thing with Scott as the #3. If they find a nice back later in the draft maybe they grab one.

But there is no need to be paying Jacobs a mil a season to be the #4.
Because he's experienced, hungry to prove himself and he will be running ANGRY after last season.

Also he would come some what cheap and he brings leadership. Something that has been missing.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 06:55 PM
The veteran minimum for him is just under a million dollars. So no.

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 06:57 PM
The team is moving forward, taking on Jacobs would be going backwards.

They drafted a running back in the first round, they have to use him.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 06:59 PM
Because he's experienced, hungry to prove himself and he will be running ANGRY after last season.

Also he would come some what cheap and he brings leadership. Something that has been missing.

You dont think Brown and Wilson are eager to prove themselves?

I see no value in adding Jacobs for a mil a season as a backup to backups.

jomo
02-06-2013, 06:59 PM
The team is moving forward, taking on Jacobs would be going backwards.

They drafted a running back in the first round, they have to use him.+1

Gmen2005
02-06-2013, 07:00 PM
no

myles2424
02-06-2013, 07:00 PM
We giant fans have a hard time moving on lol.....Bring in a rookie to go along with wilson/brown/scott....end of story

jomo
02-06-2013, 07:00 PM
Time to move on................
His legacy as a Giant is safe.

miked1958
02-06-2013, 07:01 PM
Brought this up in the Boley forum yesterday and was shot down saying he didnt fit in anymore

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 07:01 PM
You dont think Brown and Wilson are eager to prove themselves?

I see no value in adding Jacobs for a mil a season as a backup to backups.
Slip what happens if Brown goes down again for who knows how many games? Wilson will be the sole back... Scott?

Jacobs is reliable and I promise you he would be a pleasant surprise.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:03 PM
Slip what happens if Brown goes down again for who knows how many games? Wilson will be the sole back... Scott?

Jacobs is reliable and I promise you he would be a pleasant surprise.

Then you draft a guy in the 7th round.

Jacobs is 30 years old, costs a mil a season, and had an entire season to rot away. And he wasnt particularly good back when he actually played.

He averaged 3.8 ypc the last season he was a giant. Thats awful.

jomo
02-06-2013, 07:03 PM
Slip what happens if Brown goes down again for who knows how many games? Wilson will be the sole back... Scott?

Jacobs is reliable and I promise you he would be a pleasant surprise.Jacobs reliable? He has had one nagging injury after another over the past 3 years. Let's secure his legacy in NY by not signing him. I'd rather go with another young back who can help on ST and perhaps flash some upside.

Cloud57
02-06-2013, 07:08 PM
Why are we still talking about Jacobs?

Rudyy
02-06-2013, 07:09 PM
We seriously need to move on from the Jacobs hype..

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 07:12 PM
Then you draft a guy in the 7th round.

Jacobs is 30 years old, costs a mil a season, and had an entire season to rot away. And he wasnt particularly good back when he actually played.

He averaged 3.8 ypc the last season he was a giant. Thats awful.

Drafting a guy that late would never see the field. Bradshaw had serious talent, I doubt we luck out like that again.

The line was ATROCIOUS his last season with us. He's a big game performer.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:14 PM
Drafting a guy that late would never see the field.

The line was ATROCIOUS his last season with us. He's a big game performer.

Jacobs would never see the field either! Unless you want him to play over Wilson + Brown + Scott

NYGabriel
02-06-2013, 07:17 PM
So he can tip-toe around the line of scrimmage? No thanks.

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 07:21 PM
Jacobs would never see the field either! Unless you want him to play over Wilson + Brown + Scott

Scott yes, Wilson and Brown no. But he would be there for depth, insurance, experience and leadership. Not to mention we need someone to teach Wilson/Brown.

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 07:21 PM
So he can tip-toe around the line of scrimmage? No thanks.

You're one of those guys?

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 07:24 PM
Scott yes, Wilson and Brown no. But he would be there for depth, insurance, experience and leadership. Not to mention we need someone to teach Wilson/Brown.
Brown is the same age as Bradshaw - what does he need to be taught?

This team needs to lock up its young guys, paying large for declining vets will be doing nothing to help them do that.

JPP=BEASTMODE
02-06-2013, 07:34 PM
Because he's experienced, hungry to prove himself and he will be running ANGRY after last season.Also he would come some what cheap and he brings leadership. Something that has been missing.+1

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2013, 07:41 PM
They need a RB with some mileage to provide experience. Nobody is saying he should share carries with Wilson. But as the third back? Why not? It's not like Brown has ever played a whole season. He would have to totally be on board with the plan that TC had for him though.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:46 PM
They need a RB with some mileage to provide experience. Nobody is saying he should share carries with Wilson. But as the third back? Why not? It's not like Brown has ever played a whole season. He would have to totally be on board with the plan that TC had for him though.

Why do they need a 30 year old HB who averaged under 4 ypc his last season here to teach the younger players how to play?

Id much rather have Scott run than Jacobs.

NYG4lifeNYK
02-06-2013, 07:48 PM
Why do they need a 30 year old HB who averaged under 4 ypc his last season here to teach the younger players how to play?

Id much rather have Scott run than Jacobs.

Because we have no veteran leadership or experience in the RB corps?

Tell me a guy better than Jacobs that provides, experience, leadership, big game mentality, character, passion and despite what everyone thinks gives 110% every play.

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 07:49 PM
Makes alot more sense than keeping Lumpkin, that's fo sho.

Why?

teaneck
02-06-2013, 07:50 PM
With the money situation I don't know if bringing back Jacob (or a veteran RB) would be the wisest thing this year. I could see the giants addressing all the other problems first and then possibly looking at vet RBs

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2013, 07:52 PM
Why do they need a 30 year old HB who averaged under 4 ypc his last season here to teach the younger players how to play?

Id much rather have Scott run than Jacobs.

Have you ever seen Jacobs run when he is pissed off? It really depends what kind of role Jacobs is looking for. If he could accept the small role that he would get here, then I think he fits great.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:53 PM
Because we have no veteran leadership or experience in the RB corps

Leadership? You need leadership at every position now?

This will be Browns 4th year in the league.

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:53 PM
Have you ever seen Jacobs run when he is pissed off? It really depends what kind of role Jacobs is looking for. If he could accept the small role that he would get here, then I think he fits great.

What small role? Why do we want Jacobs getting carries?

The only way we want Jacobs to come in and get carries is if he is better than Wilson or Brown. And there is no way he is.

SweetZombieJesus
02-06-2013, 07:54 PM
People, Jacobs is DONE. Maybe as a 4th back for vet minimum.

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 07:54 PM
Because we have no veteran leadership or experience in the RB corps?

Tell me a guy better than Jacobs that provides, experience, leadership, big game mentality, character, passion and despite what everyone thinks gives 110% every play.

They are releasing veteran players. Why would be bring Jacobs back when he wasn't all that productive when he was last here? Hes now a year older.

Where is it written we need a "leader: in the running back group?

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 07:56 PM
Have you ever seen Jacobs run when he is pissed off?
Have you seen him sit down pissed off? That's what he did this season.

He'd be a clear #3 on the Giants - who's to say he wouldn't complain about his lack of game-time again?

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 07:58 PM
People, Jacobs is DONE. Maybe as a 4th back for vet minimum.

Which is still just under $1mil. Not cheap.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2013, 08:06 PM
Have you seen him sit down pissed off? That's what he did this season.

He'd be a clear #3 on the Giants - who's to say he wouldn't complain about his lack of game-time again?

Like I said, if he was cool being that third guy.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2013, 08:09 PM
They are releasing veteran players. Why would be bring Jacobs back when he wasn't all that productive when he was last here? Hes now a year older.

Where is it written we need a "leader: in the running back group?

They are releasing vets that make too much money. It's not like they don't want Bradshaw, he just makes more than he is worth right now. I am just not ready to trust these guys 100% without any insurance. If Jacobs wanted to come here for vet minimum and be the third string back, that would be great insurance...

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 08:15 PM
They are releasing vets that make too much money. It's not like they don't want Bradshaw, he just makes more than he is worth right now. I am just not ready to trust these guys 100% without any insurance. If Jacobs wanted to come here for vet minimum and be the third string back, that would be great insurance...

I just don't see it based on his productivity when he was here.

nhpgiantsfan
02-06-2013, 08:21 PM
I just don't see it based on his productivity when he was here.

I understand his YPC weren't good in his last year, but it would be someone to comfortably fill in when Brown gets hurt, or if Wilson needs a blow. I mean Scott is a non factor. He couldn't even get into the mix when Brown went down this year and we had to pick up guys off the scrap heap. Like I said, only if he could accept a very minimal role, and I really don't anticipate him getting a lot of phone calls this offseason, it might be the only way he gets a job.

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 08:25 PM
I understand his YPC weren't good in his last year, but it would be someone to comfortably fill in when Brown gets hurt, or if Wilson needs a blow. I mean Scott is a non factor. He couldn't even get into the mix when Brown went down this year and we had to pick up guys off the scrap heap. Like I said, only if he could accept a very minimal role, and I really don't anticipate him getting a lot of phone calls this offseason, it might be the only way he gets a job.

They will not go into the season with just Wilson and Brown. We have Scott under contract and Lumpkin did a decent job in very limited action late in the season. I'm not saying Lumpkin is a savior, but I'd like to see him compete in camp.

Rudyy
02-06-2013, 08:27 PM
We don't need Jacobs and he's not coming back.

/Thread

TheEnigma
02-06-2013, 08:28 PM
I agree with the OP here. Let's bring back Jacobs...








For a one day contract so he can officially retire with the team.

nycisgreat
02-06-2013, 08:30 PM
All season everyone complains that Wilson doesnt get enough carries.

Now he is the starter and everyone wants the giants to bring in every other HB to take carries from him.

Why not let Wilson and Brown do their thing with Scott as the #3. If they find a nice back later in the draft maybe they grab one.

But there is no need to be paying Jacobs a mil a season to be the #4.

I agree. I am a big time BJ supporter, but we have enough horses in the stable. No need to add another player to the payroll if not needed.

jomo
02-06-2013, 08:42 PM
I just don't see it based on his productivity when he was here...........and no upside plus a high veteran minimum. It is not going to happen. We can get more production, plus a ST guy with upside for less money. Did I miss anything RF?

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 08:44 PM
..........and no upside plus a high veteran minimum. It is not going to happen. We can get more production, plus a ST guy with upside for less money. Did I miss anything RF?

No, you have nailed it. He was a great competitor, but we're clearly moving to the young guns now and we will find leaders among them.

embeshAtYa
02-06-2013, 09:13 PM
Jacobs is old and beat up. His career is probably over. Jesus allready. Dont ever want to see him again. What is wrong with some of you guys. Let it go allready!!

NYGiantsFan56
02-06-2013, 09:42 PM
Bringing back Jacobs is not a mistake. His veteran presence was missed last year and he would be a good reserve and situational runner. Brown has never played a full season and Scott got hurt. Wilson cant play every down and I don't want him to either. For under a million you get a veteran who knows the system and will light a fire in the locker room. To many intangibles to pass up

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 10:07 PM
I think after this stint with the 49ers, Jacobs would be thrilled to come back as an insurance policy back.

I'd love to see him as the 3rd string RB.....plus he's a very sturdy blocker, and he's 100% healthy.

Sosynciere
02-06-2013, 10:20 PM
So he can tip-toe around the line of scrimmage? No thanks.

Unfortunately, this.

Martyr
02-06-2013, 10:21 PM
On stand by with Jacobs jersey

Sosynciere
02-06-2013, 10:21 PM
People, Jacobs is DONE. Maybe as a 4th back for vet minimum.

Concise response. To the point. I like it.

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 10:22 PM
Bringing back Jacobs is not a mistake. His veteran presence was missed last year and he would be a good reserve and situational runner. Brown has never played a full season and Scott got hurt. Wilson cant play every down and I don't want him to either. For under a million you get a veteran who knows the system and will light a fire in the locker room. To many intangibles to pass up
What was wrong with Bradshaw's veteren presence?

Sosynciere
02-06-2013, 10:24 PM
Releasing Bradshaw does leave the running back depth chart a little thin. He was a thousand yard back last year. Might have to get a replacement for that in the offense. But that's not Jacobs. Jacobs doesn't give us much of what we need. This is football: Go Young!

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 10:27 PM
Releasing Bradshaw does leave the running back depth chart a little thin. He was a thousand yard back last year. Might have to get a replacement for that in the offense. But that's not Jacobs. Jacobs doesn't give us much of what we need. This is football: Go Young!

They've got the future with Wilson. I like Jacobs as an insurance policy only....like Zombie said, vet minimum.

The guy is healthy, knows the playbook, and is a solid blocker. I like him as the #3 dude, maybe even #4 if needed.

Sean Montemayor
02-06-2013, 10:28 PM
I think after this stint with the 49ers, Jacobs would be thrilled to come back as an insurance policy back.I'd love to see him as the 3rd string RB.....plus he's a very sturdy blocker, and he's 100% healthy. Do I sense some sarcasm? Lol.

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 10:31 PM
Do I sense some sarcasm? Lol.

Seriously, the guy is a good blocker. He was dying to come back to the Giants. Physically, he's "younger" than Bradshaw, too.

I think Jacobs would be a great backup.....perfect at #3 or even #4 on the chart, depending on who else they have.

I like Andre Brown alot, but the guy is injury prone. Last season, they were down to Wilson and a couple dudes signed off the street.

The main question is where is his head at......but if he's okay riding the pine, I'd sign him.

Sosynciere
02-06-2013, 10:33 PM
They've got the future with Wilson. I like Jacobs as an insurance policy only....like Zombie said, vet minimum.

The guy is healthy, knows the playbook, and is a solid blocker. I like him as the #3 dude, maybe even #4 if needed.

I get what your saying, only if he's dirt cheap. Except the Giants don't seem to carry more than three backs, one of whom almost always plays in some way on special teams. At this stage, I'm not sure where in the the entire NFL I see Jacobs as a fit. Maybe dysfunctional Oakland. Just seems like an Oakland move. As some like to say, this is chess, not checkers. Jacobs just seems like a "checkers" move.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:20 PM
If Reese was smart I sign Jacobs right now. Can get him for Veteran Minimum and be a good back up to Brown and Wilson. The guy has fresh legs and he has chip on his shoulder. Didn't play all last year. Should have eneough in the tank and would shore up RB position for a cheap cost.

Playing the contrarian........if Reese DOESN'T sign Jacobs right now......will he NOT be smart?


Also......I doubt BJ gets an offer from anyone.

JJC7301
02-06-2013, 11:21 PM
I say bring back Bradshaw.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:23 PM
I don't want Gilbride to outsmart himself.

Just.Start.Wilson.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:23 PM
I say bring back Bradshaw.

AFTER we see how the surgery goes.......and for less $

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 11:27 PM
I don't want Gilbride to outsmart himself.

Just.Start.Wilson.

Gilbride expects the running back to block like Anthony Munoz.

I'm almost glad Adrian Peterson isn't a Giant.....it would kill me to watch him sit on the bench.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:28 PM
Gilbride expects the running back to block like Anthony Munoz.

I'm almost glad Adrian Peterson isn't a Giant.....it would kill me to watch him sit on the bench.Lol

Sean Montemayor
02-06-2013, 11:28 PM
I don't want Gilbride to outsmart himself. Just.Start.Wilson. +1

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:29 PM
Gilbride expects the running back to block like Anthony Munoz.

I'm almost glad Adrian Peterson isn't a Giant.....it would kill me to watch him sit on the bench.

Wilson had problems with blocking........as did the o-line. You want Eli injured?

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:30 PM
Wilson had problems with blocking........as did the o-line. You want Eli injured?To be fair, Bradshaw wasn't exactly "Mr. Gotchyaback" towards the end, either.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:33 PM
To be fair, Bradshaw wasn't exactly "Mr. Gotchyaback" towards the end, either.

I disagree completely. He wasn't the mountain that Jacobs was, but he was WAY better than Wilson.

bearbryant
02-06-2013, 11:37 PM
All season everyone complains that Wilson doesnt get enough carries.

Now he is the starter and everyone wants the giants to bring in every other HB to take carries from him.

Why not let Wilson and Brown do their thing with Scott as the #3. If they find a nice back later in the draft maybe they grab one.

But there is no need to be paying Jacobs a mil a season to be the #4.

Don't wake 'em up!

Sean Montemayor
02-06-2013, 11:37 PM
Don't ya just love debates?

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 11:39 PM
AFTER we see how the surgery goes.......and for less $
He's 26 and coming off a 1000 yard season. Another team will sign him.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:41 PM
I disagree completely. He wasn't the mountain that Jacobs was, but he was WAY better than Wilson.By "towards the end," I mean late last year. He got absolutely abused in the Ravens game.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:42 PM
He's 26 and coming off a 1000 yard season. Another team will sign him.

So, we should just bring him back PRE-surgery for what he was due?

Flip Empty
02-06-2013, 11:44 PM
So, we should just bring him back PRE-surgery for what he was due?
I'm just saying that I don't think he will be back. A team like the Packers could use him.

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 11:45 PM
Wilson had problems with blocking........as did the o-line. You want Eli injured?

Wilson's blocking improved, and Bradshaw's deteriorated as his body busted down.

With respect to blocking, they could have split Wilson out as a receiver....it would have effectively taken a linebacker off the line and forced them to cover Wilson, instead of forcing Wilson to block a linebacker...... but that sort of **** was never Gilbride's strength.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:46 PM
By "towards the end," I mean late last year. He got absolutely abused in the Ravens game.

He was the last person to protect Eli behind a o-line that looked like a JV highschool line. What the hell could he have done? Wilson would not have been able to protect Eli either.

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 11:47 PM
By "towards the end," I mean late last year. He got absolutely abused in the Ravens game.

That's what I'm referring to as well.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:47 PM
Wilson's blocking improved, and Bradshaw's deteriorated as his body busted down.

With respect to blocking, they could have split Wilson out as a receiver....it would have effectively taken a linebacker off the line and forced them to cover Wilson, instead of forcing Wilson to block a linebacker...... but that sort of **** was never Gilbride's strength.

You guys are forgetting just how bad our o-line was last year. Throwing Wilson to the wolves would have gotten Eli killed.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:49 PM
He was the last person to protect Eli behind a o-line that looked like a JV highschool line. What the hell could he have done? Wilson would not have been able to protect Eli either.Seriously? He couldn't pick up free rushers! Forget about the OL's struggles.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:50 PM
You guys are forgetting just how bad our o-line was last year. It improved from our Super Bowl year in every single category. Granted, not saying much, but the "OL stopped us from success" argument doesn't support itself.

Cloud57
02-06-2013, 11:52 PM
It improved from our Super Bowl year in every single category. Granted, not saying much, but the "OL stopped us from success" argument doesn't support itself.OL cost us the Falcons, Ravens, and Bengals game

Carter.525
02-06-2013, 11:53 PM
If Reese is looking for a vet to bring in.. BJ is not a terrible idea

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 11:55 PM
You guys are forgetting just how bad our o-line was last year. Throwing Wilson to the wolves would have gotten Eli killed.

I think in part this is true.....but sometimes the best tonic for an offensive line is a running back that can turn a good lane into a 40+ yard TD run.

When Eli is sailing perfect bombs into the hands of Nicks and Cruz, Gilbride looks like a genius. But Eli went from "insanely good" in 2011 to "good" in 2012, and Gilbride did very little to compensate it.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:55 PM
OL cost us the Falcons, Ravens, and Bengals gameHakeem Nicks getting dominated, Cruz dropping passes, missed field goals, and porous defense played no role? Interesting.

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:56 PM
It improved from our Super Bowl year in every single category. Granted, not saying much, but the "OL stopped us from success" argument doesn't support itself.

The o-line struggled for the last 2 years.....our DEFENSE was the difference between a SB run and missing the playoffs.

gmen0820
02-06-2013, 11:58 PM
The o-line struggled for the last 2 years.....our DEFENSE was the difference between a SB run and missing the playoffs.So you think our offense was good down the stretch, but our DEFENSE was the reason we didn't make the playoffs?

FBomb
02-06-2013, 11:58 PM
I think in part this is true.....but sometimes the best tonic for an offensive line is a running back that can turn a good lane into a 40+ yard TD run.

When Eli is sailing perfect bombs into the hands of Nicks and Cruz, Gilbride looks like a genius. But Eli went from "insanely good" in 2011 to "good" in 2012, and Gilbride did very little to compensate it.

Nicks was injured all season.....Cruz got the dropsies and Manningham was gone. I don't think KG believed we could run the ball with that line.

joemorrisforprez
02-06-2013, 11:59 PM
It improved from our Super Bowl year in every single category. Granted, not saying much, but the "OL stopped us from success" argument doesn't support itself.

I think Andre Brown had some terrific patience with his lanes and his blockers, and it certainly made the offensive line look alot better. Wilson was so ****ing fast that he could squeeze a couple yards out of a play that wasn't there.

Bradshaw in his prime was an explosive, dynamic runner.....back in the day, it covered up what was an impatient style. He could bail on a play, and improvise and bull his way out of trouble. But when his feet starting to fail him, that lack of patience became a problem.

FBomb
02-07-2013, 12:03 AM
So you think our offense was good down the stretch, but our DEFENSE was the reason we didn't make the playoffs?

No.....our offense carried us until the defense stepped at the end of the year when we won the SB. Last year NIETHER stepped up.

joemorrisforprez
02-07-2013, 12:03 AM
Nicks was injured all season.....Cruz got the dropsies and Manningham was gone. I don't think KG believed we could run the ball with that line.

This is true.

But there were other options that Gilbride didn't lean on enough.....guys like Bennett, Hynoski, Randle.

Gilbride has come into games with some terrific plans....sometimes he looks like a genius.....but when things aren't working his way, the adjustments just don't seem to follow.

gmen0820
02-07-2013, 12:03 AM
I don't think KG believed we could run the ball with that line.Certainly not consistently with Bradshaw. Wilson on the other hand proved to be able to make very much with very little -- both in terms of his workload, and blocking executions.

FBomb
02-07-2013, 12:05 AM
Certainly not consistently with Bradshaw. Wilson on the other hand proved to be able to make very much with very little -- both in terms of his workload, and blocking executions.

Again...I disagree......AB was a much better blocker.

gmen0820
02-07-2013, 12:06 AM
Again...I disagree......AB was a much better blocker.Whoops, my bad, not what I meant. I meant the way his line blocked for him; I should've made that more clear.

FBomb
02-07-2013, 12:11 AM
Whoops, my bad, not what I meant. I meant the way his line blocked for him; I should've made that more clear.

Gotcha.....he sees things a lot differently than AB I think.

gmen0820
02-07-2013, 12:13 AM
Gotcha.....he sees things a lot differently than AB I think.Yeah, Bradshaw seems a little more instinctive, but it often gets him in trouble when he bounces around. Especially since the OL struggles to sustain blocks in the run game.