PDA

View Full Version : Is It Mental Or Physical With Brandon Jacobs?



ikebibby91
01-24-2012, 02:10 PM
He should be able to lay out and get three yards without much effort. What is it? I really want him to succeed, I love to see him out in space or plowing through defenders. It is a crime to have a body like that and get stopped on third and short. He should be making defenses get out of the way or die trying to. What the hell is wrong? Why is he tip toeing through the tulips.

NYG4Life10
01-24-2012, 02:16 PM
I believe it Both </P>


To me it doesnt matter because this WILL be his last game as a Giant, Time for a New back to go with Bradshaw. Then another thing is we need a New LT,LG,and RT so this offseason will be a fun and interesting one to follow</P>

ikebibby91
01-24-2012, 02:19 PM
I believe it Both </p>


To me it doesnt matter because this WILL be his last game as a Giant, Time for a New back to go with Bradshaw. Then another thing is we need a New LT,LG,and RT so this offseason will be a fun and interesting one to follow</p>

Honestly dude ,I can't even go there. That is talk for spring to me. I want these guys to have fun in this Super Bowl and win. You can't buy or draft team chemistry.

GameTime
01-24-2012, 02:27 PM
He should be able to lay out and get three yards without much effort. What is it? I really want him to succeed, I love to see him out in space or plowing through defenders. It is a crime to have a body like that and get stopped on third and short. He should be making defenses get out of the way or die trying to. What the hell is wrong? Why is he tip toeing through the tulips.
</P>


When ever the subject of Jacobs being able todo this orthat I always come back to this:</P>


There is a reason 99% of the running backs past, present, and future are not 6'5" and 265 pounds. There have been a few exceptions but as well all know excpetions are not the norm. The position calls for a more compact and lower type body profile. </P>


He is too big, cant get nearly low enough, high center of gravity, and way too long legs for a RB IMO. He has been good but just because he is big doesnt really matter. </P>


On the flip side I dont know why he is not used more for dump offs and the few plays he made in the begining of the season with those 15 yard passes down the side lines. Would like to see more of that. </P>


</P>

NYGFaninILL
01-24-2012, 03:00 PM
He should be able to lay out and get three yards without much effort. What is it? I really want him to succeed, I love to see him out in space or plowing through defenders. It is a crime to have a body like that and get stopped on third and short. He should be making defenses get out of the way or die trying to. What the hell is wrong? Why is he tip toeing through the tulips.
</P>


When ever the subject of Jacobs being able to*do this or*that I always come back to this:</P>


There is a reason 99% of the running backs past, present, and future are not 6'5" and 265 pounds. There have been a few exceptions but as well all know excpetions are not the norm. The position calls for a more compact and lower type body profile. </P>


He is too big, cant get nearly low enough, high center of gravity, and way too long legs for a RB IMO.* He has been good but just because he is big doesnt really matter. </P>


On the flip side I dont know why he is not used more for dump offs and the few plays he made in the begining of the season with those 15 yard passes down the side lines. Would like to see more of that. </P>


*</P>

1000% agree

Zaggs
01-24-2012, 03:06 PM
Both. With the line not up to Giants standards this year, his type of running isn't going to work well. The line gets very little push most plays so he cannot get a head of steam going. When he has momentum its hard to tackle him at the legs, when its just his first few steps, its easy. Mental in that they want Bradshaw to be the starter, Jacobs wants to be the starter, so he keeps trying probably to bust out big runs instead of going full ahead.

G-Man67
01-24-2012, 03:09 PM
well it's both, but i've seen every single team in the NFL struggle on these short yardage situations .... when NFL defences know what's coming ... they stop it most of the time



Jacobs is a runner that needs a hole, especially at this point in his career ... he needs to get a bit of a head of steam and then he can do damage either by blowing up DBs or with his surprising speed for a guy his size



Bradshaw is a much better option for us in short yardage b/c he is harder for the defence to see, he does a great job of keeping his legs moving, he has lower center of gravity, he can fit thru much smaller holes and he runs as hard as any back in the league

rainierjef
01-24-2012, 03:21 PM
its the line why don't people understand that. jacobs doesn't have the acceleration speed to hit the holes fast enough before they blocked up so its imperative that they create some type of running room fast long enough for him to build up steam to power through whoever else. honestly i say experiement with him at TE in the offseason if we don't want to let him go jsut a thought

BurnerNYG
01-24-2012, 03:24 PM
I don't understand why they don't convert him into a fullback.

GameTime
01-24-2012, 03:28 PM
I don't understand why they don't convert him into a fullback.</P>


if he cant get low enough to an effective RB then he will never be able to get low enough to runblock properly...</P>


Just ask Hynoski. Thats was his problem coming into the NFL. He had to change his technique. </P>


</P>

bflo23
01-24-2012, 03:31 PM
O-line has failed Jacobs and Bradshaw this season. Look at both of their stats. That is the #1 reason why the Giants were ranked last in the NFL in rushing. I don't see holes being created anymore with this O-line.

In 2010, the O-line used to make huge holes and Jacobs/Bradshaw were dominating with their rushing yards. 6th in the NFL in rushing. Jacobs was getting 5.6 yards per rush.

Jacobs didn't suddenly change from 2010 to 2011. It is the O-line that has failed Jacobs AND BRADSHAW!

CGBlue
01-24-2012, 03:41 PM
agree with a previous reply........lets back him for now and focus on this final game. However, one must also look ahead to next year and I that we need a good consistant back.....and the same can be said for a reliable TE alla Gronkgawski....Graham...Davis....is Bravaro available?

JJC7301
01-24-2012, 03:49 PM
Our o-line is not what it was and the rest of the league finally figured out that you tackle a guy his size at the ankles.</P>


Regardless of the result of the SB, MAJOR CHANGES to be made on the o-line next year.</P>

JJC7301
01-24-2012, 03:51 PM
O-line has failed Jacobs and Bradshaw this season. Look at both of their stats. That is the #1 reason why the Giants were ranked last in the NFL in rushing. I don't see holes being created anymore with this O-line.

In 2010, the O-line used to make huge holes and Jacobs/Bradshaw were dominating with their rushing yards. 6th in the NFL in rushing. Jacobs was getting 5.6 yards per rush.

Jacobs didn't suddenly change from 2010 to 2011. It is the O-line that has failed Jacobs AND BRADSHAW!
</P>


You're right -- ZERO holes. Jacobs may be too expensive for us to afford next year, but I'd love to see him and AB get one more shot behind a GOOD OL that can create holes.</P>

BlueBlitzer
01-24-2012, 03:54 PM
Eli and the WRs might be getting the OL Gold Watches after the season. The RBs should just give them Coal in their Stockings.

bflo23
01-24-2012, 03:56 PM
You're right -- ZERO holes. Jacobs may be too expensive for us to afford next year, but I'd love to see him and AB get one more shot behind a GOOD OL that can create holes.</p>

I am not saying that Jacobs doesn't have flaws in his game (lack of quickness, runs a little bit too much upright) but the #1 reason for the Giants rushing failure is the o-line. As for keeping him? Gonna have to be real cheap. He is gonna be 30 years old and we all know what happens to RBs when they hit 30. Football is a young men's game and especially running backs that wear out really quick.