for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Do Giants carry RBs, FB, H Back, and 4 TEs?

adamg : 8/8/2016 6:36 pm
I read an article from Ranaan the other day (I can't remember which one exactly; it could have even been a tweet Q& A), anyway, he mentioned that Whitlock and Johnson are playing essentially exclusive positions. He calls Johnson a true H-Back.

My main question is: what does this suggest for the 53 man roster?

To me, this suggests that both players make the end tally. Whitlock gets in as the sole FB, a good specials guy, and a potential defensive option; while Johnson gets in as a good puzzle piece to blocking and plugging the various holes that can arise with the iffy ROL/LT play we've had as well as specials and the rare pass catcher.

Also, Jordan et al. have suggested that the Giants could have up to 4 TEs. Between Tye, Adams, Donnell, and Lacosse. That's 6 spots. Between potentially having 5 RBs (including Darkwa and Williams) and several extra WRs (do both King and Lewis make it?) looking good, how do you guys envision the offensive roster being reduced to fit the ~25 spots?

Does Whitlock have as sure a spot as Ranaan implies?

And for all the love of our injured safeties go, I don't see how any of them other than Berhe can make the 53 with all our other position groups being so seemingly deep. (i.e. Collins, Thompson, and Berhe)
I doubt the Giants  
pjcas18 : 8/8/2016 6:44 pm : link
keep 4 TE's period.

and I also doubt they keep 4 RB's a FB and an H-Back.

If they keep both a FB and an H-Back I think it would be at the expense of Andre Williams (or the 4th RB - Jennings, Vereen and Perkins are locks IMO) - which if they run the offense like GB might make sense, Kuhn got a lot of short yardage carries, and if Johnson can fill the role of Kuhn then maybe he makes Williams expendable.

RE: I doubt the Giants  
adamg : 8/8/2016 6:52 pm : link
In comment 13062432 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
keep 4 TE's period.

and I also doubt they keep 4 RB's a FB and an H-Back.

If they keep both a FB and an H-Back I think it would be at the expense of Andre Williams (or the 4th RB - Jennings, Vereen and Perkins are locks IMO) - which if they run the offense like GB might make sense, Kuhn got a lot of short yardage carries, and if Johnson can fill the role of Kuhn then maybe he makes Williams expendable.


I thought that Whitlock was the most expendable until Jordan mentioned the exclusivity of his position with regard to Johnson. Any chance the Giants don't have a FB?

It also sounds like Darkwa and Williams are looking pretty good. What that means isn't clear. Also, it's not clear that either one is leaving the other behind. Based on the last two days of reports, Darkwa is ahead. Based on the last month before those two days, AW was ripped and looking better. It's seems totally unclear how the RBs are shaping up outside of Perkins, Jennings, and Vereen.
RE: RE: I doubt the Giants  
pjcas18 : 8/8/2016 6:57 pm : link
In comment 13062439 adamg said:
Quote:
In comment 13062432 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


keep 4 TE's period.

and I also doubt they keep 4 RB's a FB and an H-Back.

If they keep both a FB and an H-Back I think it would be at the expense of Andre Williams (or the 4th RB - Jennings, Vereen and Perkins are locks IMO) - which if they run the offense like GB might make sense, Kuhn got a lot of short yardage carries, and if Johnson can fill the role of Kuhn then maybe he makes Williams expendable.




I thought that Whitlock was the most expendable until Jordan mentioned the exclusivity of his position with regard to Johnson. Any chance the Giants don't have a FB?

It also sounds like Darkwa and Williams are looking pretty good. What that means isn't clear. Also, it's not clear that either one is leaving the other behind. Based on the last two days of reports, Darkwa is ahead. Based on the last month before those two days, AW was ripped and looking better. It's seems totally unclear how the RBs are shaping up outside of Perkins, Jennings, and Vereen.


It's just a numbers thing to me. the depth is unique so even if Williams, Darkwa, Rainey, etc, all look good the Giants aren't likely IMO to keep more than 4 RB's on the 53-man.

None are eligible for the PS as far as I know.

TE I'm less sure of the depth, all those guys seem mediocre. I don't see the value of keeping 4-mediocre TE's or developmental TE's at the expense of another position.

and FB vs H-back is different. and Whitlock didn't excel in short yardage running or blocking last year, so unless he's improved I don't see his utility in that role.
I thought Whitlock  
grizz299 : 8/8/2016 6:58 pm : link
beefed up, so he could play defense.
No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
BillT : 8/8/2016 7:10 pm : link
4 RB, a FB, a HBack and 4 TE would use up 10 spots and with 2 QB leave you only 13 spots for OL and WR which would mean 8 OL and 5 WR. They aren't going to short those spots for guys like Whitlock and a 4th TE. Makes no sense. The Giants have always kept 9 and sometime 10 or 11 OL. 6 WR has been standard as well.
RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
Klaatu : 8/8/2016 7:26 pm : link
In comment 13062466 BillT said:
Quote:
4 RB, a FB, a HBack and 4 TE would use up 10 spots and with 2 QB leave you only 13 spots for OL and WR which would mean 8 OL and 5 WR. They aren't going to short those spots for guys like Whitlock and a 4th TE. Makes no sense. The Giants have always kept 9 and sometime 10 or 11 OL. 6 WR has been standard as well.


That was then, this is now.

If McAdoo is heavily influenced by his time in Green Bay, well, just go back and look at their rosters for the last five years or so. Four TEs was not unusual, nor were five WRs. I'm not saying he'd do the same thing here, but I wouldn't completely dismiss it. You never know.
RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
adamg : 8/8/2016 7:28 pm : link
In comment 13062466 BillT said:
Quote:
4 RB, a FB, a HBack and 4 TE would use up 10 spots and with 2 QB leave you only 13 spots for OL and WR which would mean 8 OL and 5 WR. They aren't going to short those spots for guys like Whitlock and a 4th TE. Makes no sense. The Giants have always kept 9 and sometime 10 or 11 OL. 6 WR has been standard as well.


That's why I asked this. 53 spots add up very quickly, especially with the OL and DL depth needed. ~9 spots a piece there. If they do take 10 OL; there's not going to be a lot of those safties people like to pick favorites of. As far as backs go, I'd think they'd take Darkwa over Whitlock, and yet Darkwa still seems to really need to outshine Williams.

I suppose only time will tell, but I was curious about whether Whitlock+Johnson was a possibility. Sounds like it isn't, from your perspective (which I'd tend to agree with).
RE: RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
UberAlias : 8/8/2016 7:29 pm : link
In comment 13062484 Klaatu said:
Quote:
In comment 13062466 BillT said:


Quote:


4 RB, a FB, a HBack and 4 TE would use up 10 spots and with 2 QB leave you only 13 spots for OL and WR which would mean 8 OL and 5 WR. They aren't going to short those spots for guys like Whitlock and a 4th TE. Makes no sense. The Giants have always kept 9 and sometime 10 or 11 OL. 6 WR has been standard as well.



That was then, this is now.

If McAdoo is heavily influenced by his time in Green Bay, well, just go back and look at their rosters for the last five years or so. Four TEs was not unusual, nor were five WRs. I'm not saying he'd do the same thing here, but I wouldn't completely dismiss it. You never know.
This is true. At one point in 2011 when McAdoo was the TE coach they had 5 TEs on the 53.
RE: RE: RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
BillT : 8/8/2016 7:48 pm : link
In comment 13062491 UberAlias said:
Quote:
In comment 13062484 Klaatu said:


Quote:


In comment 13062466 BillT said:


Quote:


4 RB, a FB, a HBack and 4 TE would use up 10 spots and with 2 QB leave you only 13 spots for OL and WR which would mean 8 OL and 5 WR. They aren't going to short those spots for guys like Whitlock and a 4th TE. Makes no sense. The Giants have always kept 9 and sometime 10 or 11 OL. 6 WR has been standard as well.



That was then, this is now.

If McAdoo is heavily influenced by his time in Green Bay, well, just go back and look at their rosters for the last five years or so. Four TEs was not unusual, nor were five WRs. I'm not saying he'd do the same thing here, but I wouldn't completely dismiss it. You never know.

This is true. At one point in 2011 when McAdoo was the TE coach they had 5 TEs on the 53.

And TC kept 4 once, if I remember. But I'm not buying more than 3 TE here. Not with Will Johnson as the FB, H-Back TE hybrid.
Based on everything I have read this month  
Carthonfan : 8/8/2016 7:52 pm : link
Donnell, Vereen, and Tye would make good trade bait. They all have some trade value and they are expendable due to depth at their respective positions. Finding a natural trading partner is difficult but worth exploring. We have needs on the Oline.
RB's  
stretch234 : 8/8/2016 7:58 pm : link
I am still trying to understand the W. Johnson hype. For a guy supposedly so versatile, how you do only catch 31 passes in 4 years.

The massively maligned Williams has 19 catches in half the games

What TE are you getting rid of to keep him.

Now if it is him over Whitlock, that is different.

LaCosse to me seems like the next great camp player who wont play. How he suddenly was judged the best blocking TE on here, without actually being able to block is funny. There seems to be no reports of him coming out being any kind of blocker.

I would still rather take the chance on Adams and LaCosse at TE over Johnson
stretch  
bc4life : 8/8/2016 9:09 pm : link
He's primarily a blocker, a fullback and can catch when called upon. if you recall a lot of the problems last year had to do with blocking at the TE position both on the line and the formations where they line up in the backfield.
stretch234  
Klaatu : 8/8/2016 10:07 pm : link
Did you see the clip of LaCosse going toe-to-toe with JPP? It was pretty cool. And the book on him was that he was known to be a good blocker. The fact that he can run and catch is just an added bonus.
FB Nikita Whitlock is a superb Special Teams Player,  
SGMen : 8/8/2016 11:56 pm : link
He can only play FB, not TE or HBack, as I understand it and he may be phased out by Johnson who can take the FB carries if necessary (we don't see all the practices and plans, right?).

Will we carry R. Jennings, A. Williams, O. Dwarka, S. Vereen, P Perkins at RB

Will we carry TE W. Tye, M. Lacosse, L. Donnel, J. Adams, W. Johnson?

I final pre-season game, health, and versatility will determine who sticks more than anything. I'm actually still hoping we trade TE Donnell who can't block well and can't get YAC. He does get open though.
RE: FB Nikita Whitlock is a superb Special Teams Player,  
adamg : 8/9/2016 12:25 am : link
In comment 13062696 SGMen said:
Quote:
He can only play FB, not TE or HBack, as I understand it and he may be phased out by Johnson who can take the FB carries if necessary (we don't see all the practices and plans, right?).

Will we carry R. Jennings, A. Williams, O. Dwarka, S. Vereen, P Perkins at RB

Will we carry TE W. Tye, M. Lacosse, L. Donnel, J. Adams, W. Johnson?

I final pre-season game, health, and versatility will determine who sticks more than anything. I'm actually still hoping we trade TE Donnell who can't block well and can't get YAC. He does get open though.


Special teams' role has been vastly reduced with all the rule changes. Whitlock being premiere as a specials guy is largely outweighed if Johnson is a premier backfield blocker. Sounds like either they want a stacked backfield or Whitlock is done.
RE: RE: FB Nikita Whitlock is a superb Special Teams Player,  
SGMen : 8/9/2016 12:40 am : link
In comment 13062705 adamg said:
Quote:
In comment 13062696 SGMen said:


Quote:


He can only play FB, not TE or HBack, as I understand it and he may be phased out by Johnson who can take the FB carries if necessary (we don't see all the practices and plans, right?).

Will we carry R. Jennings, A. Williams, O. Dwarka, S. Vereen, P Perkins at RB

Will we carry TE W. Tye, M. Lacosse, L. Donnel, J. Adams, W. Johnson?

I final pre-season game, health, and versatility will determine who sticks more than anything. I'm actually still hoping we trade TE Donnell who can't block well and can't get YAC. He does get open though.



Special teams' role has been vastly reduced with all the rule changes. Whitlock being premiere as a specials guy is largely outweighed if Johnson is a premier backfield blocker. Sounds like either they want a stacked backfield or Whitlock is done.
If I was a betting man I'd be TE L. Donnell and RB O. Dwarka are both final cuts unless injuries hit or they aren't impressed enough with rookie TE Adams.
RE: RE: RE: FB Nikita Whitlock is a superb Special Teams Player,  
adamg : 8/9/2016 12:46 am : link
In comment 13062711 SGMen said:
Quote:
In comment 13062705 adamg said:


Quote:


In comment 13062696 SGMen said:


Quote:


He can only play FB, not TE or HBack, as I understand it and he may be phased out by Johnson who can take the FB carries if necessary (we don't see all the practices and plans, right?).

Will we carry R. Jennings, A. Williams, O. Dwarka, S. Vereen, P Perkins at RB

Will we carry TE W. Tye, M. Lacosse, L. Donnel, J. Adams, W. Johnson?

I final pre-season game, health, and versatility will determine who sticks more than anything. I'm actually still hoping we trade TE Donnell who can't block well and can't get YAC. He does get open though.



Special teams' role has been vastly reduced with all the rule changes. Whitlock being premiere as a specials guy is largely outweighed if Johnson is a premier backfield blocker. Sounds like either they want a stacked backfield or Whitlock is done.

If I was a betting man I'd be TE L. Donnell and RB O. Dwarka are both final cuts unless injuries hit or they aren't impressed enough with rookie TE Adams.


Considering A. Williams history, Adams has at least a full season to improve and I expect him to.

Also considering that, Williams may be gone in final cuts. Darkwa was said to look explosive in offense drills. He also plays a lot of coverage specials. Those two facts could spell the end of Williams.
RE: RE: RE: RE: FB Nikita Whitlock is a superb Special Teams Player,  
SGMen : 8/9/2016 12:57 am : link

Considering A. Williams history, Adams has at least a full season to improve and I expect him to.

Also considering that, Williams may be gone in final cuts. Darkwa was said to look explosive in offense drills. He also plays a lot of coverage specials. Those two facts could spell the end of Williams. [/quote]If Dwarka was kept over Williams i would NOT be totally surprised. McAdoo is keep the best 53. Neither Dwarka nor Williams are eligible for the PS.
Johnson  
Dragon : 8/9/2016 4:00 am : link
Is the puzzle are they just not using him at FB to save him or is he really the swing back that will replace the FB in our offense. Since OTA's he has been with the TE's much more than FB however is Whitlock really a better FB than him seems not likely. Today it seems that they will keep four TE's I can't see five does not make sense to dress three and have two inactive each week. It's still very early but I don't see Adams not making this team at this point unless he is hurt we know who the top two TE's are LaCrosse seems third are both Johnson or Whitlock better upside then Adams not likely.

As for WR King he needs to prove it in games has been bounced around the league for three plus years without much results. Is he a better option than Lewis in the future we will see as the preseason unfolds the WR position is still very wide open at this point.
To answer the OP  
BlueLou : 8/9/2016 5:48 am : link
No Fooking way the Giants will devote 6 roster slots from 53 to any combination of FB, HBack, and tight ends.

I would even venture to guess that it's more likely they keep 5 RBs than 6 players from the former group.

Injuries are bound to sort things out too.
Special team selectees will affect team depth at certain positions.  
idinkido : 8/9/2016 5:57 am : link
For example: If Andre Williams doesn't prove he can be a starter in the preseason then, in my opinion, he is gone and Dakwa, an effective special teamer (and probably a better runner), will take William's roster spot.
RE: Special team selectees will affect team depth at certain positions.  
BlueLou : 8/9/2016 6:19 am : link
In comment 13062743 idinkido said:
Quote:
For example: If Andre Williams doesn't prove he can be a starter in the preseason then, in my opinion, he is gone and Dakwa, an effective special teamer (and probably a better runner), will take William's roster spot.


Darkwa's rep at STs is the main reason I suppose they might keep 5 RBs...

As far as STs guys go, a few comments
RE: Special team selectees will affect team depth at certain positions.  
BlueLou : 8/9/2016 6:25 am : link
In comment 13062743 idinkido said:
Quote:
For example: If Andre Williams doesn't prove he can be a starter in the preseason then, in my opinion, he is gone and Dakwa, an effective special teamer (and probably a better runner), will take William's roster spot.


Darkwa's rep at STs is the main reason I suppose they might keep 5 RBs...

As far as STs guys go, a few comments by MacAdoo bear attention. He's praised Whitlock's versatility re STs and D, Perkins' effort on STs, and Davis's effort at all his projected roles.

Adams needs to show something at sts.
RE: RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
Milton : 8/9/2016 6:35 am : link
In comment 13062487 adamg said:
Quote:
53 spots add up very quickly, especially with the OL and DL depth needed. ~9 spots a piece there.
They can easily get by with only 8 OL and 8 DL on the 53 man roster. It's not like they are going to dress any more than that on game day anyway. They can use the practice squad to fill out the remaining necessary depth along both lines. I'm not predicting only 8 OL and 8 DL make the roster, but it's not out of the question, especially when you consider OL and DL are the least useful on special teams.
RE: RE: RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
BlueLou : 8/9/2016 6:43 am : link
In comment 13062748 Milton said:
Quote:
In comment 13062487 adamg said:
Quote:
53 spots add up very quickly, especially with the OL and DL depth needed. ~9 spots a piece there.

They can easily get by with only 8 OL and 8 DL on the 53 man roster. It's not like they are going to dress any more than that on game day anyway. They can use the practice squad to fill out the remaining necessary depth along both lines. I'm not predicting only 8 OL and 8 DL make the roster, but it's not out of the question, especially when you consider OL and DL are the least useful on special teams.


Not to nitpick Milton but athletic DL played important roles on STs pretty often under TV. Sometimes were even STs premier aces. Tollefson, Tuck, even nitwit DaMontre Moore.

OL, yeah, not much use except playing OL roles on PATs and FGs. Certainly not running down to cover a punt or kickoff.
The 'final' cut isn't actually final.  
Big Blue Blogger : 8/9/2016 6:56 am : link
Roster tinkering is continuous, especially in Weeks 1 and 2. When the Giants cut to 53, the roster might tilt 26-24 or even 27-23 toward offense, if the staff concludes that the 26th and 27th offensive players are more valuable (and more likely to find jobs elsewhere) than the 24th defender. Similarly, the initial roster might feature only eight OL or five WR, even if the intention is to add a body in the coming weeks to restore depth. Unlike last year, I don't think players who don't belong in the League will make the team just to fill out the bottom of the roster (let alone play key roles, like Parker and Unga.)

Five WR is pretty easy to imagine, with as many as four on the practice squad if Dable winds up in the international spot. Going light on linemen is a possibility too. How important is it to protect a Romeo Okwara, Davon Coleman or Shane McDermott from waivers? Pre-season will tell. It will be harder to skimp at LB if Goodson isn't ready to contribute - assuming Thomas comes off PUP and reclaims his job - though Thomas or Casillas could be cut if the newcomers outplay them.

In short, the staff can borrow a roster spot or two from several places to beef up the RB/TE/FB/H-Back area. Eventually, injuries will dictate a return to more normal roster math.
How many players that made the final 53 last year  
Jimmy Googs : 8/9/2016 8:04 am : link
won't even be in the league this season?

8 or so...
no way they keep 4 TEs. And they only keep 3 from this  
Victor in CT : 8/9/2016 9:39 am : link
group if Adams shows something. The 3rd TE may not be on this roster. I would think they will be looking for a blocking type when the cuts start.
RE: RE: RE: RE: No. And you have to ask who they won't keep as well as who they will  
Milton : 8/9/2016 5:23 pm : link
In comment 13062749 BlueLou said:
Quote:
In comment 13062748 Milton said:


Quote:


In comment 13062487 adamg said:
Quote:
53 spots add up very quickly, especially with the OL and DL depth needed. ~9 spots a piece there.

They can easily get by with only 8 OL and 8 DL on the 53 man roster. It's not like they are going to dress any more than that on game day anyway. They can use the practice squad to fill out the remaining necessary depth along both lines. I'm not predicting only 8 OL and 8 DL make the roster, but it's not out of the question, especially when you consider OL and DL are the least useful on special teams.



Not to nitpick Milton but athletic DL played important roles on STs pretty often under TV. Sometimes were even STs premier aces. Tollefson, Tuck, even nitwit DaMontre Moore.
Not saying there are no roles or they don't contribute, but the guys who make the roster on their special teams play are guys who can run and they are usually linebackers, receivers, runningbacks and the like (Tyree, Blackburn, Herzlich). When was the last time you read that a DL made the roster because he was able to distinguish himself on special teams?
Nikita Whitlock last year.  
BlueLou : 8/9/2016 5:48 pm : link
Guys like Brad Barr and Ishaq Williams and Romeo Okwara, call them "LBs" if you want but for any of them to make the team they had better be able to play STs first, and secondly to appear to have some upside to rush the passer, acting more as situational DL than true LBs.
RE: The 'final' cut isn't actually final.  
SGMen : 8/9/2016 5:57 pm : link
In comment 13062755 Big Blue Blogger said:
Quote:
Roster tinkering is continuous, especially in Weeks 1 and 2. When the Giants cut to 53, the roster might tilt 26-24 or even 27-23 toward offense, if the staff concludes that the 26th and 27th offensive players are more valuable (and more likely to find jobs elsewhere) than the 24th defender. Similarly, the initial roster might feature only eight OL or five WR, even if the intention is to add a body in the coming weeks to restore depth. Unlike last year, I don't think players who don't belong in the League will make the team just to fill out the bottom of the roster (let alone play key roles, like Parker and Unga.)

Five WR is pretty easy to imagine, with as many as four on the practice squad if Dable winds up in the international spot. Going light on linemen is a possibility too. How important is it to protect a Romeo Okwara, Davon Coleman or Shane McDermott from waivers? Pre-season will tell. It will be harder to skimp at LB if Goodson isn't ready to contribute - assuming Thomas comes off PUP and reclaims his job - though Thomas or Casillas could be cut if the newcomers outplay them.

In short, the staff can borrow a roster spot or two from several places to beef up the RB/TE/FB/H-Back area. Eventually, injuries will dictate a return to more normal roster math.
Good point on the roster "tinkering" - the first game against Dallas may require us to keep a "guy" or two we would not have kept due to matchup issues and injuries (inactives) and so forth. You just don't know until the final cuts. Odd thing is final cuts to 53 and cuts to 75 are only like 4 or 5 days apart, the 4th pre-season game is sandwiched in between.
Back to the Corner