Posts
You may notice on the left-hand side of this page a poll. That's something new we're trying out, and we'll do a lot more of these if you guys respond the way I think you will.
This week's poll revolves around the concerns many of you have about how Brandon Jacobs has been running so far. I'll keep it open until Wednesday at 5 p.m. so everybody gets a chance to see it and vote. And don't be afraid to vote and then leave a comment here to back up your ballot.
It's important that you do vote, too. There's a Nobel Peace Prize at stake here. So, get the relatives and exercise your right as an American. It's the right thing to do.
EP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Are defenses more likely to place 8 men in the box with Jacobs in the backfield?
ReplyDeleteIs Jacobs being used more in short yardage situations? If it's third and 2 and you get 2, that's a successful play.
Are the Giants passing less frequently with Jacobs? Are they using play action more or less frequently? Are they passing more or less successfully with Jacobs?
It's not just raw yards per rush. Other factors play into the success of an offense with a back.
I think keeping the split between Jacobs and Bradshaw the same is the best route for the Giants for a couple of reasons. While Bradshaw has come through with the big play ability he hinted at last season, it's still the one-two punch that makes the combo so effective. Even with several less than stellar showings so far this year, Jacobs is a back that demands tremendous respect. Would defenses play differently against us if we featured Bradshaw? I think so.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, we know that Bradshaw suffers from a lingering foot/ankle injury. He's already aggravated it to some extent even with his limited carries. With the success he has in his current role, best not to get greedy. Great early season production isn't going to matter one bit if he's too beat up to play come December.
Basically, it's not broke. Let's not break it.
Love the poll Ernie. This is an awesome blog, too. I'd recommend it to all my friends ... you know, if I had any friends. Then again, if I had any friends I wouldn't be spending all my time on the internet reading blogs.
ReplyDeleteBut I digress.
What was the question?
Oh, I'd give Jacobs 20 carries and Bradshaw 15. But when Jacobs is running I'd always have Fat Tony Siragusa standing in the end zone holding a steak. Or maybe I'd tell Jacobs there's a contract extension waiting for him in the end zone. Maybe that'll get him running with a sense of urgency.
"Would defenses play differently against us if we featured Bradshaw? I think so."
ReplyDeleteI think that defenses know which back is in and change their approach accordingly.
This whole change of pace thing is pretty silly imho. It's not like baseball where a changeup messes up you timing. Football is not that split second.
Ernie,
ReplyDeleteWhat's the old saying? "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?"
I love what Bradshaw brings to this team, but I still have concerns over whether he can carry the load 20-25 times a game, especially with this nagging ankle injury. Jacobs isnt off to his best start, but I cant see him not getting back to form this season. He's a guy who's always run hard and moved piles. And unless he's injured and we dont know it, I dont see why it wont continue. I say keep Jacobs as the #1 and let him wear guys down. But at the same time, use Bradshaw more. Especially in passing situations. We havent run the screen well since Tiki left, and I think Ahmad can be that guy for us.
ReplyDeleteBut either way, I agree with "if it aint broke, dont fix it." Our running game has picked it up lately, regardless of how Jacobs looks. Keep it the way it is.