PDA

View Full Version : Brandon Jacobs Franchised


diabsoule
02-13-2009, 03:22 PM
Just saw it on ESPN. This is definitely big news and takes one of the premier FA Running Backs out of contention.

HawkeyeFan
02-13-2009, 03:23 PM
How much again is the cost on franchising him?

diabsoule
02-13-2009, 03:24 PM
How much again is the cost on franchising him?

$6.6 million. Quite a bit.

HawkeyeFan
02-13-2009, 03:27 PM
Thanks, well it's not as bad as I figured.

Giantsfan1080
02-13-2009, 03:28 PM
I just posted this in the Giants forum but I like this move a lot. Jacobs probably only has maybe 3 years in him so I'd use the tag twice and then let him walk. This is probably the precursor for an extension but either way it works out well.

jth1331
02-13-2009, 03:33 PM
I would NEVER sign ANY RB to a FA deal. Signing a FA RB to a big deal has for the most part never worked out.

BmoreBlackByrdz
02-13-2009, 03:35 PM
I just posted this in the Giants forum but I like this move a lot. Jacobs probably only has maybe 3 years in him so I'd use the tag twice and then let him walk. This is probably the precursor for an extension but either way it works out well.

I totally agree with that. His running style will wear him down and I think he will have a much shorter career than other RB's right now. Thats the approach I'd take if I were the Giants.

PACKmanN
02-13-2009, 03:50 PM
I would NEVER sign ANY RB to a FA deal. Signing a FA RB to a big deal has for the most part never worked out.

examples...

Turtlepower
02-13-2009, 03:53 PM
$6.6 million. Quite a bit.

Not nearly as much as I thought. Compared to other skill positions, I feel that this was a FANTASTIC move. I personally thought that the tag was closer to 9 or 10 million.

San Diego Chicken
02-13-2009, 03:54 PM
I would NEVER sign ANY RB to a FA deal. Signing a FA RB to a big deal has for the most part never worked out.

Really? It didn't seem to work out too badly for Atlanta last season.

TitanHope
02-13-2009, 04:03 PM
What affect does franchising a player have on compensatory picks?

Giantsfan1080
02-13-2009, 04:06 PM
What affect does franchising a player have on compensatory picks?

We would get 2 1st rounders if another team signed him.

BmoreBlackByrdz
02-13-2009, 04:17 PM
Heres the link

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2009/02/new_york_giants_designate_bran.html

Geo
02-13-2009, 04:19 PM
What affect does franchising a player have on compensatory picks?
None, re-signing your own players - which the franchise tag is one method of doing - doesn't effect compensatory picks.

If Jacobs plays out his tender in 2009 and then goes on to sign a big deal with another team next offseason, the Giants would be in line to receiver a comp pick in 2011 assuming they don't sign someone next offseason to offset that loss.

D-Unit
02-13-2009, 06:54 PM
Good move seeing as he's injured so often, but has such a big impact when healthy.

CashmoneyDrew
02-13-2009, 07:08 PM
Darren Sproles may have just went up in demand a little bit more.

TitanHope
02-13-2009, 07:48 PM
Darren Sproles may have just went up in demand a little bit more.

Indoubadably, old chum!

I don't think there's a Michael Turner caliber RB in FA this year. Jacobs was the highest caliber, with Sproles 2nd. However, there are proven RB's who while not being franchise type guys they can carry a load and be an invaluable #2.

scottyboy
02-13-2009, 07:53 PM
i honestly believe we work out an extension at the end of the offseason heading towards camp, something around 3 years or so, but that's just me.

he said he wants to be a Giant for life, so we'll see...

keylime_5
02-13-2009, 07:58 PM
Jacobs is one of my favorite backs in the league. The Giants are gonna need him, especially if they ditch burress. I heard the Browns were thinking about making a serious run at him if he hit the market, but that doesn't seem to be the case now.

Splat
02-13-2009, 08:06 PM
Jacobs probably only has maybe 3 years in him so I'd use the tag twice and then let him walk.

Yep don't make the same mistake the Chiefs made with LJ if they can sign him to a reasonable deal so be it but don't break the bank.

That style of running takes a toll on a RB so fast they can go from a pro bowl player to average pretty fast and you don't want to be in a middle of a huge deal when it happens.

brat316
02-13-2009, 08:08 PM
How many teams this year were actually looking to upgrade at Rb? Most teams are looking for that second back, or depth.

Greenbay-could use insurance for Grant
Cincy-could pick up one pretty easily in the second round.
Cardinals- could take Darren Sproles or draft a compliment back
Cleavland- get some one young behind Jamal, again maybe sproles
Detroit
Kansas
Seahawks

brat316
02-13-2009, 08:09 PM
Yeah good luck using a tag 3 times on a player.

keylime_5
02-13-2009, 08:29 PM
How many teams this year were actually looking to upgrade at Rb? Most teams are looking for that second back, or depth.

Greenbay-could use insurance for Grant
Cincy-could pick up one pretty easily in the second round.
Cardinals- could take Darren Sproles or draft a compliment back
Cleavland- get some one young behind Jamal, again maybe sproles
Detroit
Kansas
Seahawks

I think we're looking for someone to replace Jamal. Word from around Cleveland is that they're finished with Lewis and his contract.

M.O.T.H.
02-13-2009, 08:39 PM
How many teams this year were actually looking to upgrade at Rb? Most teams are looking for that second back, or depth.

Greenbay-could use insurance for Grant
Cincy-could pick up one pretty easily in the second round.
Cardinals- could take Darren Sproles or draft a compliment back
Cleavland- get some one young behind Jamal, again maybe sproles
Detroit
Kansas
Seahawks

Denver and Tampa could be looking RB as well.

diabsoule
02-13-2009, 08:39 PM
Denver and Tampa could be looking RB as well.

So could Seattle.

gramage
02-13-2009, 08:47 PM
At $6.6 million I get the move, but how much can you invest in a player that one dimensional? Jacobs is a one of a kind athlete at his position but without a legit big play guy to share carries your not going to have a great running game. The giants have big play running backs who aren't up for new deals so it works out this year, but I agree with what others are saying, don't expect him to last too long.

Vox Populi
02-13-2009, 09:11 PM
michael turner... priest holmes... jamal lewis... thomas jones... chester taylor... warrick dunn... reuben droughns... stephen davis...

oh wait. you wanted examples of how they're always failures?

Didn't you know Shaun Alexander represents every running back ever :confused:

BlindSite
02-14-2009, 12:53 AM
I don't really like this move, why not give him a 3-4 year deal at 2 mill a year with a 6-7 mill signing bonus, 15million in money all together, nothing to sneeze at for a committee back. 5 mill per year cap hit

Turners' deal with Atlanta was 34.5 million with 15 in bonus over a period of six years, which is 5.25 mill a year cap hit.

Not a bad deal and not a franchise breaking one either. Feasibly he's got 2 good strong years ahead of him, and there's no discounting the difference he made in some games. The Carolina game springs to mind, watching him tear apart our tacklers was painful... it was off his back they made a fightback to win and secure home field (even though it didn't help).

So it'd be a pretty similar deal.

jth1331
02-14-2009, 01:25 AM
examples...

Well, tell me how Edgerrin James, Larry Johnson, Shaun Alexander, Travis Henry to name a few

michael turner... priest holmes... jamal lewis... thomas jones... chester taylor... warrick dunn... reuben droughns... stephen davis...

oh wait. you wanted examples of how they're always failures?

First, I said examples of signing to a BIG contract. Most of those guys you listed weren't exactly signed to record breaking deals I was implying. Turner is I think the only one who was signed to a big contract, maybe Davis was, but even then Davis only had 1 decent year and never achieved more than 549 yards in a season after his 1st year in Carolina. And I don't think I'd consider one okay year and 1 below average year for Jamal Lewis to be a good example.
I'm just not one who thinks you should invest a ton of money into the RB position these days. Too much money to invest in a risky position when someone else can do a decent job for a lot less money. Maybe its just I'm a Bronco fan and have seen success with just about any RB they plug back there, I don't know, I just don't see a reason to invest into a long term contract with an "old" RB.

diabsoule
02-14-2009, 02:10 AM
Well, tell me how Edgerrin James, Larry Johnson, Shaun Alexander, Travis Henry to name a few



First, I said examples of signing to a BIG contract. Most of those guys you listed weren't exactly signed to record breaking deals I was implying. Turner is I think the only one who was signed to a big contract, maybe Davis was, but even then Davis only had 1 decent year and never achieved more than 549 yards in a season after his 1st year in Carolina. And I don't think I'd consider one okay year and 1 below average year for Jamal Lewis to be a good example.
I'm just not one who thinks you should invest a ton of money into the RB position these days. Too much money to invest in a risky position when someone else can do a decent job for a lot less money. Maybe its just I'm a Bronco fan and have seen success with just about any RB they plug back there, I don't know, I just don't see a reason to invest into a long term contract with an "old" RB.

Njx is a Broncos fan as well. Don't think a lot of money should be invested in the running back position? I'm sure Philadelphia (Brian Westbrook), Buffalo (Marshawn Lynch), Washington (Clinton Portis), Atlanta (Michael Turner), Minnesota (Adrian Peterson), etc..., disagree with you. Having an effective running game is one of the most important aspects of winning in the NFL.

jth1331
02-14-2009, 03:09 AM
Njx is a Broncos fan as well. Don't think a lot of money should be invested in the running back position? I'm sure Philadelphia (Brian Westbrook), Buffalo (Marshawn Lynch), Washington (Clinton Portis), Atlanta (Michael Turner), Minnesota (Adrian Peterson), etc..., disagree with you. Having an effective running game is one of the most important aspects of winning in the NFL.

How many playoff games did those teams win? Championships? Having an effective running game is important, but that doesn't mean you have to shell out millions to one RB.
Steelers won a Super Bowl with an average running game, with no real marque player earning big bucks.
Giants won a Super Bowl with the strength of having multiple backs being able to tote the ball.
Colts won a Super Bowl having two guys able to share the load in Addai and Rhodes.
Patriots won Super Bowls with Antowain Smith as their RB, not paying him big bucks.

And then, theres the production of guys in the middle rounds who turn out to be solid backs. Brandon Jacobs, Frank Gore, Slaton, Turner, Westbrook, etc.
I guess the only exception would be if you had a RB with super extraordinary talent, like a Ladainian Tomlinson or Adrian Peterson.

Bengalsrocket
02-14-2009, 03:53 AM
How many playoff games did those teams win? Championships? Having an effective running game is important, but that doesn't mean you have to shell out millions to one RB.
Steelers won a Super Bowl with an average running game, with no real marque player earning big bucks.
Giants won a Super Bowl with the strength of having multiple backs being able to tote the ball.
Colts won a Super Bowl having two guys able to share the load in Addai and Rhodes.
Patriots won Super Bowls with Antowain Smith as their RB, not paying him big bucks.

And then, theres the production of guys in the middle rounds who turn out to be solid backs. Brandon Jacobs, Frank Gore, Slaton, Turner, Westbrook, etc.
I guess the only exception would be if you had a RB with super extraordinary talent, like a Ladainian Tomlinson or Adrian Peterson.

Well, the Giants will end up paying big bucks to Brandon Jacobs now, with whom they won that Superbowl. And lets not forget, Addai was a 1st round pick (though a late first rounder).

But anyways, play off games and championships are hardly the right areas to analyze here. Patriots, Colts and Giants all had many other aspects of the game working for them while maintaining an average to good rushing attack.

And likewise, it's hardly Adrian Peterson's fault that the vikings didn't win a championship, nor Marshawn Lynch, Brian Westbrook, Clinton Portis etc.

I assume Trent Dilfer was more valuable to the Ravens then Dan Marino was to the Dolphins then? After all, Dilfer got his team a ring while Marino couldn't, right?

jth1331
02-14-2009, 06:18 AM
Well, the Giants will end up paying big bucks to Brandon Jacobs now, with whom they won that Superbowl. And lets not forget, Addai was a 1st round pick (though a late first rounder).

But anyways, play off games and championships are hardly the right areas to analyze here. Patriots, Colts and Giants all had many other aspects of the game working for them while maintaining an average to good rushing attack.

And likewise, it's hardly Adrian Peterson's fault that the vikings didn't win a championship, nor Marshawn Lynch, Brian Westbrook, Clinton Portis etc.

I assume Trent Dilfer was more valuable to the Ravens then Dan Marino was to the Dolphins then? After all, Dilfer got his team a ring while Marino couldn't, right?

The fact is, there are more important positions to pay than RB IMO. You aren't going to get me to change my opinion on this matter by bringing up ridiculous statements like saying Dilfer was more valuable than Marino.
Again, look at some of the teams that finished high up in rushing. Baltimore, Patriots, Titans, and Jets. None really invested a ton of money into their RB's. I don't think McGahee and Jones earned that much anyways.
I just feel a team should look at investing money into other positions, and not get too heavily involved in the RB position. The Colts let James walk, and look where they are, in the same position making the playoffs and winning a Super Bowl.

Big_Pete
02-14-2009, 07:27 AM
I think this franchise tag is a precursor to a trade.

I think if an extention was going to be done, it would have been done by now.

I think the writing was on the wall when reports came out the Giants were opening talks with Ward about a contract extention.

It could also mean the Giants believe Danny Ware is ready to step up and share the load along with Ahmad Bradshaw.

Big_Pete
02-14-2009, 07:37 AM
I don't really like this move, why not give him a 3-4 year deal at 2 mill a year with a 6-7 mill signing bonus, 15million in money all together, nothing to sneeze at for a committee back. 5 mill per year cap hit



Perhaps because Jacobs wants, expects and will get alot more.
I can understand his point of view, it is his one shot at that big payday. RBs also have the shortest careers, so it isn't like he can let things slide for a couple more years.

In fact your suggestion may be close to what the Giants were offering.

from all reports Jacobs wants/expects something ver similar to the 7 year, $45 million deal that Marion Barber got last year.


Marion Barber's deal (from rotoword)

5/20/2008:
Signed a seven-year, $45 million contract. The deal contains $16 million guaranteed, including a $12 million signing bonus.

Base Salaries:
2009: $620,000
2010: $3.86 million
2011: $4.25 million
2012: $5.75 million
2013: $6.25 million
2014: $7 million
2015: Free Agent

scottyboy
02-14-2009, 08:41 AM
I think this franchise tag is a precursor to a trade.

I think if an extention was going to be done, it would have been done by now.

I think the writing was on the wall when reports came out the Giants were opening talks with Ward about a contract extention.

It could also mean the Giants believe Danny Ware is ready to step up and share the load along with Ahmad Bradshaw.

WHAT?!?!?!?! are you kidding me??? wow...nononononononononnonononono. you couldn't be more wrong.

We were talking with Ward just to see how much he wanted, and get a feel for what the market for him will be like blah blah blah. We weren't serious unless he said he'd come back for a big discount.

This buys us time. why would you think an extension would've been done by now? Now we've got time to focus on the offseason now without worrying about Jacobs, and used our tag before the deadline of the 19th. Reese and Jacobs said contract talks are still going on and Jacobs is confident he'll get an extension. The Giants can focus on FA and such knowing how much they've got Jacobs for.

And Bradshaw is in TC's doghouse and yea, I love Ware as much as the next guy, but he's getting the "ZOMGZ HIXON #1 WR" type of hype, and he hasn't even seen the field.

trade? really? wow...

Big_Pete
02-14-2009, 08:54 AM
As I have said, I think Jacobs' franchise tag is a precursor to a trade.

The NFL is a copycat league, many teams will want to replicate the power running game which has had proven success with teams like the Giants, Titans, Dolphins and Panthers with their multi back sets.

Three teams whom I think will be interested in trading for Jacobs: Detroit, Oakland and Seattle (there will be others).

All these teams have new coaching staffs; these guys are going to have to turn things around and quickly.

Jacobs (plus improved O-line) will provide a solid power running game. This opens up the passing game, takes the pressure of their QB to carry the offense.

It also allows their other RBs (Kevin Smith, McFadden/Fargas and Maurice Morris/Julius Jones to remain fresh/healthy and really exploit a battered defense later in the game. A good power running game and play action passing will really help a young QB (just ask Flacco or Ryan).

For Seattle, Jacobs would get them back to doing what they do best - running the ball.

For all these teams Jacobs is by far the best option, the free agent class is thin and a rookie isn't an immediate answer. Jacobs is a proven guy with proven success and a Super Bowl ring to boot. That kind of success can be electric in the locker room, particularly for a franchise trying to turn around a legacy of under achievement.

All these coaches will be under pressure to produce immediate results - that is the nature of the NFL these days. If they don't go with Jacobs, these teams are unlikely to find this kind of player this year.

Interestingly all these teams have alot of picks, particularly Detroit. I would guess that a 2nd and 4th round picks would be enough to get Jacobs.

Thats my general thinking anyways.

Big_Pete
02-14-2009, 09:08 AM
The Giants and Jacobs have had many months to work this out; they will keep working on it but things are obviously far enough apart that the Giants think another week is unlikely to resolve the situation.

I think teams will make good trade offers for Jacobs; if Detroit for example offered #33 and #129 then that is likely a done deal imho.

Detroit would still have alot of picks and free agency to address other needs; hoping that Brandon Jacobs and Kevin Smith can be that two-headed monster something like what Jonathan Stewart/DeAngelo Williams, Lendale White/Chris Johnson and Ronnie Brown/Ricky Williams have done for Carolina, Tennessee and Miami.

It is worth noting that all these teams majorly exceeded most people's expectations going into the 2008 season; arguably performing well above their weight based on a quality running game.

scottyboy
02-14-2009, 09:13 AM
big pete, please stop, and perhaps read some articles.

First off, he's not getting traded, and a 2nd and 4th wouldn't do it anyway. The guy means so much to the Giants it's not even funny. He is our most important skill position player on offense.

secondly, read the articles, he and Reese have both said that they're still working on a long term deal and Jacobs wants to retire a Giant. This idea is just so incredibly absurd, i'm in shock

MetSox17
02-14-2009, 09:32 AM
I think eventually Jacobs will get paid, either by the Giants or another team in FA. He might have to play this year under the tag, but i'm sure him and his agent will work out a deal in which tagging him again next season would be impossible.

NY+Giants=NYG
02-14-2009, 09:58 AM
This was a stupid move..

Either see the player in your long term plans and get it done, or if you can't let him walk! We had so much time to get a deal done, if it can't get down then, let him walk. 6 million for one year for Jacobs is too much in my opinion. If we see him in our plans then this deal should been already in place. If it doesn't come soon, I can see Jacobs being a big problem for us.

scottyboy
02-14-2009, 10:46 AM
This was a stupid move..

Either see the player in your long term plans and get it done, or if you can't let him walk! We had so much time to get a deal done, if it can't get down then, let him walk. 6 million for one year for Jacobs is too much in my opinion. If we see him in our plans then this deal should been already in place. If it doesn't come soon, I can see Jacobs being a big problem for us.

come on shock, i expect better from you. this makes perfect sense from a business stand point to have him ensured a Giant next year, but we can still continue to work out his contract and not rush. I fully expect him to sign a long term deal. I think he's waiting out to see what Ward and others get out on the market

Iamcanadian
02-14-2009, 11:03 AM
I don't really like this move, why not give him a 3-4 year deal at 2 mill a year with a 6-7 mill signing bonus, 15million in money all together, nothing to sneeze at for a committee back. 5 mill per year cap hit

Turners' deal with Atlanta was 34.5 million with 15 in bonus over a period of six years, which is 5.25 mill a year cap hit.

Not a bad deal and not a franchise breaking one either. Feasibly he's got 2 good strong years ahead of him, and there's no discounting the difference he made in some games. The Carolina game springs to mind, watching him tear apart our tacklers was painful... it was off his back they made a fightback to win and secure home field (even though it didn't help).

So it'd be a pretty similar deal.

You couldn't get him to sign for 2 million a year, no way no how. If you want to keep him, he would expect at least 6.6 million a year. Turner didn't have Jacobs credentials when he signed.

A.O.B.G.T No Love
02-14-2009, 02:24 PM
You couldn't get him to sign for 2 million a year, no way no how. If you want to keep him, he would expect at least 6.6 million a year. Turner didn't have Jacobs credentials when he signed.


Exactly. Don't forget that he has to actually agree to the deal. .

NY+Giants=NYG
02-14-2009, 04:00 PM
come on shock, i expect better from you. this makes perfect sense from a business stand point to have him ensured a Giant next year, but we can still continue to work out his contract and not rush. I fully expect him to sign a long term deal. I think he's waiting out to see what Ward and others get out on the market

We had all last year to get something long term but we didn't... Then all this past season and we didn't. Now we still didn't come to terms with him. Shame on us. If he figures into our plan hurry and lock him up. If not then say thanks for your services but we are looking to move on. What are they waiting for?

scottyboy
02-14-2009, 04:12 PM
We had all last year to get something long term but we didn't... Then all this past season and we didn't. Now we still didn't come to terms with him. Shame on us. If he figures into our plan hurry and lock him up. If not then say thanks for your services but we are looking to move on. What are they waiting for?

business stand points. We wanted to ensure we kept him and not rush it before the tag deadline passed. Plus, I think both sides are curious to see what the market is like. That's why we talked to Ward, see what he was looking for. If Ward and Sproles get lowballed, then that's leverage for us, which is why we waited. Jacobs wants to see if they cash in big time and perhaps hold it over us a bit...

Big_Pete
02-14-2009, 06:28 PM
big pete, please stop, and perhaps read some articles.

First off, he's not getting traded, and a 2nd and 4th wouldn't do it anyway. The guy means so much to the Giants it's not even funny. He is our most important skill position player on offense.

secondly, read the articles, he and Reese have both said that they're still working on a long term deal and Jacobs wants to retire a Giant. This idea is just so incredibly absurd, i'm in shock

I disagree with you, that doesn't make it absurd. I do read articles, but I also look deeper than what is being said on the surface.


I agree the Giants want Jacobs back, but only at the right price and Jacobs wants big money.

Jacobs is replaceable; that is the Giants RB system. It won't be the same but even without Ward there is Bradshaw and Ware; plus a RB in the draft is then likely, either around the 2nd round with someone like Shonn Greene or later rounds like PJ Hill.

Cap wise this makes alot of sense with a younger player at a fraction of the costs and allowing the Giants to invest in other need areas. This could save over $5 million against the salary cap; for example: they could possibly bring in a free agent (perhaps OLB) or extend the contracts of Barry Cofield and Domenik Hixon.

As far as Reese and Jacobs getting a deal done; they have been working on it since last offseason and still they are far enough apart for the franchise tag to come into play for the first time in over 10 years. If both sides really wanted this deal done it would (and should) have been done already.

scottyboy
02-14-2009, 07:00 PM
I disagree with you, that doesn't make it absurd. I do read articles, but I also look deeper than what is being said on the surface.


I agree the Giants want Jacobs back, but only at the right price and Jacobs wants big money.

Jacobs is replaceable; that is the Giants RB system. It won't be the same but even without Ward there is Bradshaw and Ware; plus a RB in the draft is then likely, either around the 2nd round with someone like Shonn Greene or later rounds like PJ Hill.

Cap wise this makes alot of sense with a younger player at a fraction of the costs and allowing the Giants to invest in other need areas. This could save over $5 million against the salary cap; for example: they could possibly bring in a free agent (perhaps OLB) or extend the contracts of Barry Cofield and Domenik Hixon.

As far as Reese and Jacobs getting a deal done; they have been working on it since last offseason and still they are far enough apart for the franchise tag to come into play for the first time in over 10 years. If both sides really wanted this deal done it would (and should) have been done already.

where you're wrong is bolded.

his presence alone makes a HUGE difference for us. See the games he was out this year leading to the Carolina game, and then the Carolina game. We are such a better and different team without him it's not even funny. yes, we're a RB friendly system now(see Ward) but with Jacobs, we just make that even stronger. We play so much better without him it's not even funny.

And like I said earlier, both sides want to see what the market is like and how it treats the likes of Ward and Sproles.

And again, I love Ware, but lets see him actually get carries before we call him a replacement for Jacobs and/or Ward.

Big_Pete
02-15-2009, 05:39 AM
where you're wrong is bolded.

his presence alone makes a HUGE difference for us. See the games he was out this year leading to the Carolina game, and then the Carolina game. We are such a better and different team without him it's not even funny. yes, we're a RB friendly system now(see Ward) but with Jacobs, we just make that even stronger. We play so much better without him it's not even funny.

And like I said earlier, both sides want to see what the market is like and how it treats the likes of Ward and Sproles.

And again, I love Ware, but lets see him actually get carries before we call him a replacement for Jacobs and/or Ward.

I don't see what is likely to change in the next little while about getting a deal done with Jacobs.

You are obviously a big fan of Jacobs (and there is alot to like); if you were the GM of another team how much would you pay to bring Jacobs in? That might give you a ballpark of his likely market value; remember if multiple teams want him, his value will increase. Jacobs agent should have a very good idea of how much teams are interesting in Jacobs. Maybe I am being pessimistic, but I think Jacobs value is going to go up on the open market.

Jacobs will be a loss no doubt; but our offense can adapt. In many ways this is similar to what people were saying when Tiki retired.

The Giants have been very good managing the salary cap; they are not going to risk the teams long term salary cap stability if at all possible.

I imagine there may be some concerns about the long term wear and tear of Jacobs' bruising style and the ability of him to perform at a high level over the life of a new contract. It is alot of money to invest, and Reese's job is to ensure it is invested wisely.

The Giants do have good young talent and someone will step up.

While I disagree with some of what you are saying, I do understand where you are coming from. It is good to see fans passionate about the Giants

scottyboy
02-15-2009, 09:25 AM
I don't see what is likely to change in the next little while about getting a deal done with Jacobs.

You are obviously a big fan of Jacobs (and there is alot to like); if you were the GM of another team how much would you pay to bring Jacobs in? That might give you a ballpark of his likely market value; remember if multiple teams want him, his value will increase. Jacobs agent should have a very good idea of how much teams are interesting in Jacobs. Maybe I am being pessimistic, but I think Jacobs value is going to go up on the open market.

Jacobs will be a loss no doubt; but our offense can adapt. In many ways this is similar to what people were saying when Tiki retired.

The Giants have been very good managing the salary cap; they are not going to risk the teams long term salary cap stability if at all possible.

I imagine there may be some concerns about the long term wear and tear of Jacobs' bruising style and the ability of him to perform at a high level over the life of a new contract. It is alot of money to invest, and Reese's job is to ensure it is invested wisely.

The Giants do have good young talent and someone will step up.

While I disagree with some of what you are saying, I do understand where you are coming from. It is good to see fans passionate about the Giants

I see where you're coming from too, I guess we can agree to disagree though hah. I really don't know what Jacobs' value out in the market would be. I remember reading a report at the Senior Bowl where a GM or scout(dont recall) said Jacobs will stay in NYG no doubt because it's the only place he'll produce and no team will pay him like he wants; something of that essence. It's a toss up, I'm really not sure where we'll go, but the good thing is, we've got him locked up for this next season!

BaLLiN
02-15-2009, 09:29 AM
I don't see what is likely to change in the next little while about getting a deal done with Jacobs.
Maybe they want to settle a deal in the interest of the player and the team, and thinking over 3 years in a day isnt an easy task? dur da durr

You are obviously a big fan of Jacobs (and there is alot to like); if you were the GM of another team how much would you pay to bring Jacobs in? That might give you a ballpark of his likely market value; remember if multiple teams want him, his value will increase. Jacobs agent should have a very good idea of how much teams are interesting in Jacobs. Maybe I am being pessimistic, but I think Jacobs value is going to go up on the open market.a franchise RB's value or any decent runningbacks value would go up on open market...His market value right now is two 1st round picks, and i think even then the giants would still contest anyones offer because HE WANTS TO STAY.


Jacobs will be a loss no doubt; but our offense can adapt. In many ways this is similar to what people were saying when Tiki retired. Theres a clear difference, tiki was a full back, we have a 3 back system, if we dont have jacobs what do you think happens? He is a premiere back, no one else is like him, and he is a leader. Two years ago i remember clearly he made TC go for it on fourth down and rallied everyone with Eli, thats what we need.


The Giants have been very good managing the salary cap; they are not going to risk the teams long term salary cap stability if at all possible.

I imagine there may be some concerns about the long term wear and tear of Jacobs' bruising style and the ability of him to perform at a high level over the life of a new contract. It is alot of money to invest, and Reese's job is to ensure it is invested wisely. Our cap room is in the top 10 im pretty sure, so now your just talking out of your butt.



The Giants do have good young talent and someone will step up. We do i agree, i want Bradshaw to step up, he had a sophmore slump, Danny Ware is a back that gets the job done, which is what ward did, when we put him in the last game of the season you could tell he proved himself in the teams eyes. In preseason he wrecked people. We have what we need. We're not scrambling for help in the backfield, the office was thinking the whole time, and we set up for this season at the beginning of last.

scottyboy
02-15-2009, 09:46 AM
Ballin, I believe our cap room is around the 15-20 range, if not lower. we don't have tons of cap space...

bigbluedefense
02-15-2009, 10:10 AM
Im very pleased we have him for at least one more year. I do think we reach a long term deal thats incentive laden, and that would be even better.

Jacobs presence can't be measured with his stats, even his filmstudy. The man is not the best catcher out of the backfield and has a lot to give in terms of hips, but his leadership, intensity and ability to really wear down and beat up a defense is key to our offense. Our offense is just very different without him. The oline isn't as nasty, you don't see the same fear in defenses, you don't see the same bite on PA pass, he just changes everything. He fires up the whole team, and is an important leader of our offense.

Im not saying he's the best RB out there or even top tier, but i do feel he is an important piece worth resigning. I still want us to split carries, and give Bradshaw A LOT more touches, something like 20 for Jacobs and 10 for Bradshaw, and make Bradshaw a focal point of our passing sets. I think that balance is just what we need.

He's worth resigning.

BaLLiN
02-17-2009, 07:43 PM
Ballin, I believe our cap room is around the 15-20 range, if not lower. we don't have tons of cap space...

in the begining of the season we were ranked top 10 im sure, so unless something happened where plax took all our money idts

scottyboy
02-17-2009, 08:14 PM
in the begining of the season we were ranked top 10 im sure, so unless something happened where plax took all our money idts

no, i'm pretty sure there's even been a cap thread, we're not in the top 10, not at all. I think we're around 20

Bengalsrocket
02-17-2009, 11:36 PM
Im very pleased we have him for at least one more year. I do think we reach a long term deal thats incentive laden, and that would be even better.

Jacobs presence can't be measured with his stats, even his filmstudy. The man is not the best catcher out of the backfield and has a lot to give in terms of hips, but his leadership, intensity and ability to really wear down and beat up a defense is key to our offense. Our offense is just very different without him. The oline isn't as nasty, you don't see the same fear in defenses, you don't see the same bite on PA pass, he just changes everything. He fires up the whole team, and is an important leader of our offense.

Im not saying he's the best RB out there or even top tier, but i do feel he is an important piece worth resigning. I still want us to split carries, and give Bradshaw A LOT more touches, something like 20 for Jacobs and 10 for Bradshaw, and make Bradshaw a focal point of our passing sets. I think that balance is just what we need.

He's worth resigning.

wearing down the defense is the big part. I imaging it takes a lot of those opposing players just to tackle him once or twice a series - it has to really make the team's job easier has the head towards the red zone.

Gay Ork Wang
02-18-2009, 08:46 AM
in the begining of the season we were ranked top 10 im sure, so unless something happened where plax took all our money idts
http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30032

Geo
02-18-2009, 09:26 AM
Im very pleased we have him for at least one more year. I do think we reach a long term deal thats incentive laden, and that would be even better.
There will be some incentives, but I'll be surprised if the base value isn't major. Because if the Giants don't give him that, he will get it on the open market when he does reach it.

Ryan Grant last offseason signed a deal with big incentives because he was three years away from unrestricted free agency. More importantly, he still got 4 years/$18M without incentives coming into play.

Jacobs will probably get Marion Barber money, with more guaranteed money like Michael Turner.

NY+Giants=NYG
02-18-2009, 09:54 AM
There will be some incentives, but I'll be surprised if the base value isn't major. Because if the Giants don't give him that, he will get it on the open market when he does reach it.

Ryan Grant last offseason signed a deal with big incentives because he was three years away from unrestricted free agency. More importantly, he still got 4 years/$18M without incentives coming into play.

Jacobs will probably get Marion Barber money, with more guaranteed money like Michael Turner.

I hope not.. I wouldn't overpay 1 RB in a 2-3 RB rotation system. Our offensive line is good, and our running plays are drawn up really well, so I have faith in any back that steps in. Jacobs is an above avg back running behind a elite OL, and he can't stay healthy and he can't catch the ball. Overpaying for Jacobs would really make me mad.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 05:00 PM
re-signed to a 4 year deal according to nfl.com

Splat
02-25-2009, 05:11 PM
re-signed to a 4 year deal according to nfl.com

I like the move for both sides he gets a nice deal and the G-Men don't break the bank the length of the deal is the best part.

I don't think its smart to give RB a 6 or 7 year deal after he has all ready been in the NFL a few years unless he is something special.

scottyboy
02-25-2009, 05:12 PM
4 years, 25 mil 13 guaranteed is the reported deal.

Can I do the "I told you so" dance now? :D