Fantasy Sports Forums at ScreamingSports.com

It went unremarked upon in the prior thread, so reposting here:

Aaron Ross was named the NFC's Defensive Player of the Week.

Carry on ...  

Dan ... that was a very encouraging column on Jacobs.  Thankfully, it appears he "gets it."

The O-G Man:  I saw that earlier myself ... and it's good to hear! That kid needed a confidence booster and it came at an ideal time! He has a tough test this coming Sunday.

Interesting note on Ross: He's the first Giants DB to win this award in 10 years (Percy Ellsworth).

I hope C-Web has the same selfless attitude as Jacob's or he may wind up on that mess of a team in Oakland.

I don't know if anybody clicked on the link when I posted it the other day, but this is from the USA Todays predraft bio on Jacobs from 2005:

An admitted truant, Jacobs speaks candidly about his past in Napoleanville, Louisiana, a small farming community in the southern part of the state. "I was bad," he said. "People didn't like me. In the state of Louisiana, after you get 20 absences you fail. Three years straight I was a 20-absence student. After you fail and fail and fail, people labeled me as a thug." Those same people, Jacobs said, decided that he had a learning disability and they placed him in special education classes. "It didn't hit me until after I was getting out of high school and I realized that I couldn't go to college without regular core classes and a high school diploma," he said. "I hung with the wrong crowd. When I got away from that, things started getting better. I started realizing that if I wanted to do something good with my life, I couldn't just play around."

If only the Pacman Jones' of the world had learned that lesson.

Good to hear Jacobs wants to stay. Still, I'll believe it when I see it. $$$$ talk in this league.

ithlax-

If Oakland offered you the amount of money they gave Gibril you'd be sporting the Silver and Black too.

Mr. Benton must have got my memo. I appreciate it. If you could forward to SCarroll, that would be great. And I need you to come into the office this weekend...Right. Thanks.

I'd rather have stability on a team like the Giants over a long term than at the disposal of Al Davis.

If Webster, for some odd reason, goes through another phase where he gets beaten constantly, we now see that Al Davis has no hesitation to drop big money players.

If I am BJ's agent, after reading those statements...I tell him to shut the F up and play and let me handle the contract.

Gibril is 5th in the NFL with 86 tackles.  Add in an INT and 2 fumble recoveries... and you get quite a good compensatory pick in the 2009 draft.  His incredible salary and bonus help too.  Now let's all get out there and vote him into the pro bowl.

Speaking of compensation ... Kawicka Mitchell is 2nd on his team in tackles with 56, plus he has 3 sacks, an INT, and 2 passes defensed.

Vote for him too... it all helps the Giants.

I thought you only got compensatory picks for players you drafted?  So we souldnt be expecting a pick for Mitchell, correct?  Or am I mistaken?

Gibril already wants out of Oakland...

www.profootballtalk.com/.../more-raiders-want-out

It's an older piece, but where there's smoke, there's fire.

TMQB ... I hadn't heard that. I stand corrected ... er, if I'm corrected that is.

Yeah- there is n o compensation for guys you signed as a free agent so Kawika wont garner anything. But if the Giants got a 6th for Shancoe then they might get something for Torbor.

KD-thanks for that video- I'd like to run a parlay on that ***

say it isnt so Jim-

www.profootballtalk.com/.../jim-fassel-to-the-cfl

how the moghty have fallen

DEMO, she's almost hotter than Sarah Palin...

ff55 - don't know if you saw this, so I'm reposting it from the last thread...

ff55 - if you think that with Favre the Pack "would certainly be comfortably on top of the NFC Central" you aren't watching the NFL very carefully.

The Pack's problem isn't passing, (11th ranked), or offense (4th in points), its a D ranked 27th against the rush, 12th in points and 16th in yards.

Their D has been in on 647 plays, right around the illustrious Ds from the Bengals, Broncos, 49rs and Chiefs.

Today marks the 30th anniversary of “The Fumble” of November 19, 1978. As is the case with most events of historical import, every Giants fan of a certain vintage recalls exactly where they were at the time. I was sitting in my cousin’s den, unsure whether to laugh or cry. I was 20 years old and had been a Giant fan for about 9-10 years. For the past five of those years, I had taken up watching the Giants religiously every Sunday. It was truly an odd time to become a devoted fan of the team, as ’74-’78 was arguably the nadir of the team’s existence. So for some inexplicable reason - still unknown to me – I had made a decision to spend three precious hours every weekend bearing witness to some nauseatingly horrific football. And I had stood by the decision every Sunday for five years running.

Maybe Yom Kippur wasn’t enough for this Jew. Maybe I needed to add all of the Sundays of the football season to fully atone for my transgressions. At any rate, sitting in my cousin’s den thirty years ago today, I don’t recall feeling in any way shocked. So with my cousin pacing and swearing like he was Bobby Knight on zing, I just sat there thinking how perfectly that moment embodied the futility of my choice of Sunday pastime.

I offer up this little reminiscence as a reminder to the growing legion of optimists on this site who seem to feel as if displays of pessimism directed to the 2008 edition of the Giants are somewhat unbecoming. I realize that optimism has not been in fashion long here at Giants 101; that today’s pugnacious majority was recently an embattled minority. But now that it is the optimists who wield the lion’s share of rhetorical brickbats around here, I feel compelled to point out that for some Giants fans there is a strain of fatalism that can never be expunged.

No matter how good this Giant team may prove to be, there will always be a small part of me that thinks “Don’t get fooled again.” Not rational, I know. But after the disappointments following the euphoric Super Bowl victories of the ’86 & ’90 teams, I’m ever wary of falling victim to yet another Giant “Bait ‘n’ Switch.”

So now we come to the part where I voice my lingering concerns about this team. As dominant as the Giants have looked in recent weeks, I still feel there are weaknesses that have yet to be exploited. First, I feel most of the dominance has largely been a function of the offense. If we define dominance as the ability to impose your will on your opponent, then the offense has certainly filled the bill. The defense? Not so much, in my view.

I can’t shake the notion that the defense has largely benefited from facing one dimensional offenses such as Baltimore’s last week. Yes, the Giants were able to successfully shut down the Ravens’ offensive strength – the rushing game. But what was worrisome was their inability to stop numerous completions from Flacco to Mason on obvious passing downs. In the Philly game, the Eagles had largely rendered themselves one-dimensional, limiting Westbrook to just thirteen touches. Yet, even when it became obvious that Reid’s game plan was to beat the Giants through the air, the Giants seemed powerless to stop it. McNabb appeared to be completing passes at will, untroubled by any pass rush. I still maintain that if Reid had chosen to throw, rather than run on those critical third and fourth downs on the Eagles final drive, the outcome may have been very different.

So I remain uneasy that this Giant defense will be exposed when matched up against a truly well-rounded offense. This Sunday figures to be telling as the Cards feature a strong running game to complement their elite passing attack. I still think the Giants win the game because I believe their offense can easily match Arizona score for score. But if it the Giants wind up having to win in a shootout, I will continue to harbor serious concerns about this team. Y’know, that whole bit ‘bout defense winning championships and all.

Sorry to have rambled on for so long. If you haven’t already bailed on this post, now’s the part where you get to tell me all the reasons why my inability to recognize the subtle genius of Spags’ complex schemes renders me unfit to offer any meaningful critique of the Giants’ defensive shortcomings.  Or you can just call me an idiot; your choice.

Compensatory Picks...

Wiki...

"Compensatory Picks

In addition to the 32 picks in each round, there are a total of up to 32 picks dispersed at the ends of Rounds 3 through 7. These picks, known as "compensatory picks," are awarded to teams that have lost more qualifying free agents than they gained the previous year in free agency. Teams that gain and lose the same number of players but lose higher-valued players than they gain also can be awarded a pick, but only in the seventh round, after the other compensatory picks. Compensatory picks cannot be traded, and the placement of the picks is determined by a proprietary formula based on the player's salary, playing time and postseason honors with his new team, with salary being the primary factor. So, for example, a team that lost a linebacker who signed for $2.5 million per year in free agency might get a sixth-round compensatory pick, while a team that lost a wide receiver who signed for $5 million per year might receive a fourth-round pick.

If fewer than 32 such picks are awarded, the remaining picks are awarded in the order in which teams would pick in a hypothetical eighth round of the draft (These are known as "Supplemental Compensatory Selections").

Compensatory picks are awarded each year at the NFL annual meeting which is held at the end of March; typically, about three or four weeks before the draft."

Here's a good link...

www.footballsfuture.com/.../viewtopic.php

So what round pick should we get for Gibril?

Guys, I'll bet 90% of the players becoming FA say similar things.  Saying "I want out" is a good way to create a firestorm ala Tiki's midyear retirement and they know it.  Smart players say they really want to stay to pacify the team, media and fan while knowing they'll leave if they get a good deal.

This statement means about as much as all the GMing and pining for FAs that goes on around this site.

Encouraging news on Jacobs via Mike G:

Tom Coughlin said RB Brandon Jacobs (knee) won't practice and that will likely be the case during the team portion of today's workout, which technically results in a "did not practice" classification on the injury report.

But in the portion of practice open to the media, Jacobs was jogging on the side, jumping around and catching passes during individual drills. He was like a little kid who wanted to play with his big brothers today.

And he looked pretty good to me. Based on his moving around with no noticeable limp, I'm putting his chances of playing at roughly the same as my chances of writing. But again, you never know what tomorrow will bring in terms of swelling and soreness, so we'll see.

MG

Bryan .... I don't believe for 1 second that 90% of FA's openly state they're willing to give a hometeam discount to stay.

Original G - while Dan interpreted "fair" as a hometown discount, I don't know that I see anything in his statement that suggest such a thing.

As has been previously discussed, some team (and Jacobs' agent knows this) might be willing to put big, big bucks on the table, especially if they think they are just a big back away from winning it all.

if that team is wiling to pay 25% more than the Gmen, what's a "fair" offer.  If Jacobs is meaning that say a 10% discount, maybe that doesn't get into "fair" range.  Words are funny things sometimes.  It all depends on what the definition of "is" is.

and Original G - most players, if pushed, would say that they'd like to stay where they are but they have to consider all the options yada yada yada.

OGM, that is encouraging news about Jacobs.. particularly this part of the paragraph :

"But in the portion of practice open to the media, Jacobs was jogging on the side, jumping around and CATCHING PASSES during individual drills."

It is very encouraging to see that Jacobs is finally catching the ball haha

Hedgecock should try catching balls with his feet.

Bryan -

When have you heard players say "I'm not trying to break the bank"? I've never heard that from a guy about to hit free agency.

I FIRMLY believe that Brandon Jacobs is going to get a solid offer from JR, and that he will accept a deal that will make him one of maybe the 8 or so highest paid backs in the game, but not in the top 4. And I firmly believe that he would get more money if he went elsewhere, and I believe that he knows that.

There's no way the Giants are going to short-change him, he's too important to this team and to the philosophy and approach of this team, as I've said before.

He'll get a fair offer, they'll work with it, and at the end of the day I think it'll get done - here.

Call me crazy but I'm just about POSITIVE that Jacobs resigns here.

And not because of this latest statement - I've been saying this for a while. The Giants know how important Jacobs is to what they do, and while they won't go crazy to keep him - he'll get something very fair and I think it gets done.

Call me crazy but I'm just about POSITIVE that Jacobs resigns here.

And not because of this latest statement - I've been saying this for a while. The Giants know how important Jacobs is to what they do, and while they won't go crazy to keep him - he'll get something very fair and I think it gets done.

KD-Her talking, gambling, Sarah Palin talking Politics and Erin Andrews doing the Sideline reporting would be my Three Team Parlay....

Haz- So positive you posted it twice...

haz - the thing is, its just words.  Anyone can say words with any intention.

I for one actually think the Gmen probably will resign Jacobs.  But the reality is that the majority of players that make it to FA LEAVE.  

Face it, if Jacobs really was THAT interested in staying he's signed already.  If he's intent on staying wtih the Gmen, he only risks his own neck by not having a contract done - He could blow out a knee tomorrow and be worht next to nothing.

The PC thing to say is either A) Nothing, or B) I'll stay if the offer is fair, thus leaving you the out of "well, we just couldn't get something done."  If the Gmen offer top 8 money, that might get it done.  It depends on how Jacobs sees the market.  They go 15-1 and win a SB this year, Jacobs might be able to get top 4 money.

I am in the process of reading the GM book. It is very good, but it really brings back bad memories of that lost 2006 season. Geez I forgot almost forgot about some of the pain that team brought me that year since we have had all this success lately. The Kiwi non sack, The Hester missed field goal for a touchdown, and all of the injuries (Strahan, Toomer, Osi, Tuck, Arrington) (Lol I was at that miserable Jaguars game where Willie Joe even started at Defensive end). After being almost finished with this book in a day and a half of work mind you, I am thanking my lucky stars for this current team.

Also, interesting note from the book, the Giants nearly traded the 4th pick to the Browns for their 6th pick and their second pick in an effort to get Eli, but rumor leaked that the Browns were going to make a move with the Chargers to get Eli so Accorsi balked and the Browns were pissed. Thank goodness Eli isn't on the Browns.

I think that the bottom line will be that BJAC knows he is better off playing in THIS market, behind THIS OLine, and in THIS system than playing meaningless, Games. behind Pouress OLines in Oakland or Seatle for the next 5 years. Playing For titles in NYC will lead to extra fame and fortune in its own way. Hopefully Gibril will Lob BJ a Call and tell him that the grass aint greener

Sunshine McCoy - I just read your posts from the last thread where you were disagreeing with FF55's contention that if Farve were playing for the Packers instead of Rodgers that Packers would be in 1st place in that division.  You made a decent argument by enumerating the deficiencies of their defense and then listing Rodger's QB stats.  

But you just couldn't help yourself in using this as an opportunity to take yet another cheap shot at Eli even though he wasn't even remotely involved in your argument.  But you saw fit to say in your last sentence:

".....Rodgers' numbers are comparable to or better than Eli's in every way except number of sacks....."

It's classic.  You do this all the time.  Maybe it is subconscious.  Now do you understand why you get "eaten alive" on here (using your words from yesterday?

When considering his contract options this offseason, the number that Jacobs should keep at the forefront of his mind is:

2.6.

No, that not the tens of millions he should ask for but the average nu,ber of years of an NFL running back's career. Brandon's gotta know that if he signs for Michael Turner money he'll be asked to assume a Michael Turner workload. Which he may, in fact, want to do. But if what he really wants is the chance to prolong his career by continuing to share carries behind a line that figures to remain dominant for the next 3-4 years, he has a very good chance of re-signing with New York.

Rush Limbaugh is absolutly CRUSHING McScabb on the Radio right now. It is the first time I actually heard Mcnabb say what he said.... Wow

Bryan -

As far as I know, while they did have some talks, the Giants weren't very aggressive in resigning Jacobs prior to the season. They were still looking to see how injury-prone he would be as the top back. He was out a few games last season and they wanted to see how he'd hold up before really committing to a long-term deal. I think now the situation is different.

Okay, back from the minor inconvenience of trying to make a deal or two.

I agree with Haz about it being likely Jacobs signs with the Giants and at a price lower than he could get on the open market but still very high. He has become so fundamental to the team's philosophy and character that he has made himself one of the very rare running backs you don't want to think about losing. I wrote something a few days ago about the backs who literally change the NFL: marion Motley, Jim Brown, Gayle Sayers, Marshall Faulk. Add Brandon Jacobs to the list. He is sui generis at this point. Reese has to sign him.

Bryan, yes, I fully agree that the Packers' defense has been a disgrace and that is a big reason why they're stuck in the pack (so to speak) with the Bears and the Vikes. But statistics, as you know, mean nothing much to me, and you might notice that what I said about Favre was that he "makes his team better". That goes for the defense too. He may not play on that side of the ball, but the power of his personality is felt throughout a team. Just ask the Jets. I believe that with Favre on their team the Packers are 7-3 and comfortably on top of their Division. I'm not basing that on whether Rodgers has played well. He has, although he has gone through periods where that is certainly not the case and has frequently NOT come up with the big throw when it was most needed. But give me Favre in the two close games that the Pack blew this season and I say they win both. I fully admit that is entirely speculative, and subject to much doubt, but it isn't the result of not watching the NFL. In fact I try to stay pretty close to the Packers, who have always been my second favorite team.

Haz, you are crazy. Jacobs will do like Woodward & Berstein and follow the money.

McNabb complicated his previous statement by saying he thought there's be a second OT. Did he not watch the Giants/Pack game in January? It is one thing for a position player to not know all the rules, but a QB should understant the parameters of the game in which he plays.

I think far worse than McNabb not knowing the game could end in a tie was his subsequent thought that a PLAYOFF GAME or SUPER BOWL could actually then end in a tie.  Forget not knowing a rule (even though it's a rule that EVERYBODY knows), this shows a stunning lack of intelligence.

Jacobs may be telling the truth now, but if a team comes in and offers him 10-15mil more then the Giants are  offereing, he may start having second thoughts or looking for more money from the Giants.  

Reese should work to get a deal done before the post season begins.

Danny Clark was quoted as saying he didnt know about games being able to end in ties, and he said a lot of guys in the Giants locker room didnt know either.  

The Jacobs discussion will probably be endless, but let me just add, again, that BJ could very well thrive for 4-5 years, or more, behind a line that is adept at getting him to the second level of the defense, which he knows the Giants have and will have for the length of any new contract he signs.

The Giants' blocking scheme when he is the runner looks like it is intended to get him a decent hole at the line-of-scrimmage and enough of a seal on a linebacker to allow BJ to force his way through an arm tackle and get a shot at a big gain. The Giants O-line, including the tight ends, are athletic enough that this kind of blocking scheme is relatively easy for them to execute. They use their athleticism and then depend on him to use his size and downhill speed to best advantage.

But there aren't that many other O-lines in the NFL that can do the same thing, and I suspect most of them aren't on teams that are desperate for running backs as the last piece of the puzzle to get to a Super Bowl. IF Jacobs winds up on a team that can't move out the big uglies on the defensive front then BJ is in for a long, damaging, season where he is matching his strength against that of 350-pound DTs and DE's who are at least his size. They will get to him before he can really accelerate. The result? Fewer yards, a lot more punishment, general disappointment.

He has good reasons to stay on the Giants as long as they don't try to "steal" him.

By the way, one of the things I am loving about the Giants this year is that they actually look like they are changing their blocking schemes depending upon which back is in the game. I would love to know if that's the case or just my imagination. It sure looks like they are doing more taking overpursuit and forcing the defenders out of cutback lanes when Bradshaw is in the game, and using a lot of zone blocking for Ward. But I may be wrong and just reading in too much from what I can see in a limited number of plays.

www.nydailynews.com/.../d-clark-90-percent-of-nfl-play.html

Heres that link to Clark talking about not knowing about ties... McNabb isnt the only one. (Did I just stick up for McNabb?  I think I have been reading Bryans posts too long now)

TMQB...We know more about football then these lugnuts do.

KD, I am beginning to believe that more and more everyday... truth be told, we know more about EVERYTHING then these lugnuts do.

I just don't understand how players don't know these rules. It's not like a tie hasn't happened anytime soon. It was either 2001 or 2002 the last tie and McNabb was in the league. Also, how does he not remember the Panthers Rams playoff 2 OT game when the Panthers won and went on to play the Eagles the next week. It doesn't make much sense to me.

What did McNabb actually think would then happen in a playoff game??? A do-over?  

Somewhere in two different trailer parks in the US, Tim Couch and Akili Smith are chuckling to themselves.

Give Donovan a break. He's going to be looking for another team to pay him next year. He was probably worrying about where his next cup of soup would be coming from than what the rules are in overtime.

I've always liked him, and thought he was too classy for the revolting fans in Philly. But I'd love to know how he can control an offense at the line-of-scrimmage if he can't remember a rule as elementary as that.

Whereas it is unforgivable for a player to not know that there can be ties in today's NFL is one thing, but to state it publicly has to be about the dumbest thing you can do.  It is admitting you do not know the rules of your chosen trade in front of a national TV audience.  Why would anyone do that??  It simply invites deserved criticism.  

I bet most 10 year olds know that because of games like Madden.  

Ralph V reports Jacobs says he will be able to go "full speed" tomorrow.

wow. demo listens to rush and  actually WANTS to hear sarah palin make an attempt to talk politics. unbelievable. un freaking believable. next we will be getting hannity and bill o'reilly updates on here too.

jcharles, I will be glad to give you those updates... as I watch both those shows on a regular basis.

But I would much rather sit here and talk Giants, so I will spare you the updates haha

Hey HopLax - my "eaten alive' comment was in regards to something j charles said about HIMSELF getting eaten alive on a Raven board.

And the Eli comparison was on point.  Eli's having, by all accounts, a nice season.  If Rodgers is having as good or a better season, doesn't that support my point that its not him at the heart of the Pack's problems.  I was trying to compare Rodger's season to someone we all know very well.  How is that "a cheap shot."  If anything, comparing Eli to Rodgers, while saying how good Rodgers is playing, is a compliment.

I guess I didn't read the "terms of use" agreement on here closely enough.  I didn't realize that all posts that include Eli had to fellate him.  People on here so touchy about Eli.  You can't even note that another QB has better numbers wtihout upsetting someone.  

Hell, you can't even note that a MNF listed the top 3 QBs since 2007 to lead their team to last minute wins without someone thinking its a shot at Eli.  

Want to know why everyone here thinks I'm so negative and why I think a LOT of people here are overly sensative homers in their analysis:....

"Rodgers is having a good season.  His numbers are all equal to or better than Eli" = insult to Eli.

"Anyone see the MNF graphic about late-game comebacks by QBs since 2007.  P. Manning, Favre, T. Edwards" = insult to Eli.

tmq, please do spare me. i watch them too but i am aware that it is far from fare and balanced. but neither is olberman or some others at msnbc. but i watch it all to find the middle. but rush.. that's another story. although i'll admitt bill o has been trying as of late to be fair with obama.

BRYAN. back the hell up off eli dude. rodgers aint even in the same universe as eli buddy.

and as much as i hate farve, brett plays a tougher schedule and has a better record and had a better record last year. so i think the pack may be doing better with a veteran qb as opposed to a first year qb. i think that is like common sense or something like that.