to be is a solid short yardage guy and clock churner for late in the game. That would be a HUGE win for us. Plus, we don't need to spend a pick on a back, at least early anyway and we can focus on OL, DL , LB and TE...
12-15 carries for Perkins, 3-5 each for Blount and Vereen. Gives us a really nice mix of talent and short yardage capability. He should come somewhat cheap you would think if he's taken this long to find a landing place.
the Giants could use them in the game plan accordingly. There would be games where ramming the ball down the opposition's throat is the best approach and Blount could be a real weapon then with a lot more than 5 carries.
12-15 carries for Perkins, 3-5 each for Blount and Vereen. Gives us a really nice mix of talent and short yardage capability. He should come somewhat cheap you would think if he's taken this long to find a landing place.
Checked out his contract history the other day: he's never been payed more than 2 mill per year. I'd be surprised if he even fetches 2 mill per, especially if he's a max 5-10 carry a game guy like you're suggesting.
but also not excited either. He has character issues (as JonC mentioned), flopped away from NE and on the older side. I like my RB's young. I'd prefer to draft a guy and pass on him.
who often doesn't perform as well once he moves away from a coach the caliber of Little Bill.
Its definitely the biggest concern but he won't have a feature role here outside of a Perkins injury so I'm a bit less worried about him mailing it in.
He had almost 19 carries per game last year, he won't come close to that regardless of who he signs with.
who often doesn't perform as well once he moves away from a coach the caliber of Little Bill.
He was a good player before he got to New England. Averaged 4.1 YPC with Pittsburgh. Averaged 4.55 YPC with the Bucs. He probably would have a much smaller role in New York than he did in New England.
people are talking about him being a nice complimentary player in our RB rotation. In that case, his price needs to be complimentary as well, otherwise his cost may affect the overall asset status. the value ratio is valid.
people are talking about him being a nice complimentary player in our RB rotation. In that case, his price needs to be complimentary as well, otherwise his cost may affect the overall asset status. the value ratio is valid.
You went too deep on my simple point..Asset as in complementary, short yardage, 5-10 carry back, nothing more..I thought that was implicit. Nothing to do with how much pr how little he's paid
with the draft board starting to settle out a little bit. It doesn't look like McCaffrey or Fournette will be there at 23, Cook and Mixon SHOULD be off the draft board, there might be solid value later in the draft but probably not a Week 1, everydown back.
is a lot, especially coming from the Pats. Maybe there is a place for him here. I would still look to drafting a solid young back who could make Vereen expendable.
I'd guess the Giants are keeping their options open
"locker room guy" didnt he walk out on his team when on the Steelers? Didnt he deck someone on the field in college?
Meanwhile we had 100+ post threads about BMarshall being a headcase and a problem child. You dudes are funny as hell sometimes.
Its a cost thing. He's likely pretty cheap which offsets a lot of worry the team may have. Marshall is going to be a focal point of the offense and we payed him as such; his road to getting help off the field is well documented anyway.
and his reaction was that Blount broke down as the season went on and was not the same runner. His stats bear this out somewhat. He cracked 4 yards per in Week 14 and then not again in the regular season or the postseason. Whether a limited role would keep him fresh remains to be seen, but even if our line is healthy I'm not sure he's going to have the same short yardage success in blue.
Jennings tried to be a finesse player with us and that just didn't work. Perkins hit holes Jennings couldn't physically get to, it was like night and day.
Blount, if he comes here, I would imagine will be as a short yardage bruiser/goal line back and to occasionally spell Perkins.
and his reaction was that Blount broke down as the season went on and was not the same runner. His stats bear this out somewhat. He cracked 4 yards per in Week 14 and then not again in the regular season or the postseason. Whether a limited role would keep him fresh remains to be seen, but even if our line is healthy I'm not sure he's going to have the same short yardage success in blue.
That happens a lot though, 300 carries with a lot of goal line work is draining for anyone so I can see him fading out. I wouldn't give him anymore than 80/90 carries for the season barring injury to someone else.
he scored a bunch of TDs last season but there's basically nothing in that stat that tells you anything about what he's going to do in the future. He's never even gotten half that many in any other season. Give me a younger guy that's going to contribute on special teams. There's already one "old" RB on the roster.
I'd rather see them draft another good young RB instead of giving carries to a guy who is heading towards his final years and would be behind an average at best OL here. But I guess they really could use a big bruiser back there to go with Perkins and Vereen. You have to think the cost is pretty low too if Peterson only got 3 million per year. If that number was right about his contract.
We'd all like another good, young RB.. bur resources are finite. We only have so many picks and although we're in pretty good shape, we do still have a lot of needs.
Sometimes you have to plug holes where you can. Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
I'm fairly certain, yes.
Rashad Jennings was absolutely awful last year.
Blount isn't a star RB, but he's a tough runner who scored 18 times and rushed for over 1000 yards. A shade under 4 YPC isn't what you really want to see, but the bar Jennings set last year was quite low.
We won't need to lean on Blount as heavily as NE did. We aren't going to ask him to tote the rock 300 times.
I don't think guys like Dorsey Levens, who were about 3 years removed from their last productive NFL season when they got here, are apt comparisons here.
and his reaction was that Blount broke down as the season went on and was not the same runner. His stats bear this out somewhat. He cracked 4 yards per in Week 14 and then not again in the regular season or the postseason. Whether a limited role would keep him fresh remains to be seen, but even if our line is healthy I'm not sure he's going to have the same short yardage success in blue.
His big games were also against Mia, Pitt, Hou, and SF. Not exactly the greatest defenses.
and his reaction was that Blount broke down as the season went on and was not the same runner. His stats bear this out somewhat. He cracked 4 yards per in Week 14 and then not again in the regular season or the postseason. Whether a limited role would keep him fresh remains to be seen, but even if our line is healthy I'm not sure he's going to have the same short yardage success in blue.
His big games were also against Mia, Pitt, Hou, and SF. Not exactly the greatest defenses.
Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
I'm fairly certain, yes.
Rashad Jennings was absolutely awful last year.
Blount isn't a star RB, but he's a tough runner who scored 18 times and rushed for over 1000 yards. A shade under 4 YPC isn't what you really want to see, but the bar Jennings set last year was quite low.
We won't need to lean on Blount as heavily as NE did. We aren't going to ask him to tote the rock 300 times.
I don't think guys like Dorsey Levens, who were about 3 years removed from their last productive NFL season when they got here, are apt comparisons here.
his TDs last year are meaningless when predicting what he's going to do going forward. And the total is a huge outlier compared to what he's done previously. The dropoff for Blount is coming...it's a question of when, not if. And I'd rather not be the team that finds out when. I'd also have big concerns about plucking what was essentially a role player from one of the best offenses in football. I'm thinking he didn't face a lot of fronts geared up to stop him (excluding short yardage situations obviously).
Only you..
I'm with you, buddy
Checked out his contract history the other day: he's never been payed more than 2 mill per year. I'd be surprised if he even fetches 2 mill per, especially if he's a max 5-10 carry a game guy like you're suggesting.
Its definitely the biggest concern but he won't have a feature role here outside of a Perkins injury so I'm a bit less worried about him mailing it in.
He had almost 19 carries per game last year, he won't come close to that regardless of who he signs with.
He was a good player before he got to New England. Averaged 4.1 YPC with Pittsburgh. Averaged 4.55 YPC with the Bucs. He probably would have a much smaller role in New York than he did in New England.
people are talking about him being a nice complimentary player in our RB rotation. In that case, his price needs to be complimentary as well, otherwise his cost may affect the overall asset status. the value ratio is valid.
Didn't he feel misled by Pittsburgh on his role after he signed?
people are talking about him being a nice complimentary player in our RB rotation. In that case, his price needs to be complimentary as well, otherwise his cost may affect the overall asset status. the value ratio is valid.
You went too deep on my simple point..Asset as in complementary, short yardage, 5-10 carry back, nothing more..I thought that was implicit. Nothing to do with how much pr how little he's paid
Meanwhile we had 100+ post threads about BMarshall being a headcase and a problem child. You dudes are funny as hell sometimes.
Meanwhile we had 100+ post threads about BMarshall being a headcase and a problem child. You dudes are funny as hell sometimes.
Its a cost thing. He's likely pretty cheap which offsets a lot of worry the team may have. Marshall is going to be a focal point of the offense and we payed him as such; his road to getting help off the field is well documented anyway.
Complements Vereen and Perkins perfectly. Doesn't make RB a huge need in the draft (as much of one, at least)
Blount, if he comes here, I would imagine will be as a short yardage bruiser/goal line back and to occasionally spell Perkins.
That happens a lot though, 300 carries with a lot of goal line work is draining for anyone so I can see him fading out. I wouldn't give him anymore than 80/90 carries for the season barring injury to someone else.
Sometimes you have to plug holes where you can. Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
Quote:
Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
I'm fairly certain, yes.
Rashad Jennings was absolutely awful last year.
Blount isn't a star RB, but he's a tough runner who scored 18 times and rushed for over 1000 yards. A shade under 4 YPC isn't what you really want to see, but the bar Jennings set last year was quite low.
We won't need to lean on Blount as heavily as NE did. We aren't going to ask him to tote the rock 300 times.
I don't think guys like Dorsey Levens, who were about 3 years removed from their last productive NFL season when they got here, are apt comparisons here.
His big games were also against Mia, Pitt, Hou, and SF. Not exactly the greatest defenses.
Quote:
and his reaction was that Blount broke down as the season went on and was not the same runner. His stats bear this out somewhat. He cracked 4 yards per in Week 14 and then not again in the regular season or the postseason. Whether a limited role would keep him fresh remains to be seen, but even if our line is healthy I'm not sure he's going to have the same short yardage success in blue.
His big games were also against Mia, Pitt, Hou, and SF. Not exactly the greatest defenses.
Except for Hou that is.
Quote:
In comment 13441274 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Blount would certainly be more effective than Jennings.
you sure about that? He could also fall off a cliff this season and be out of the league this time next year. Put this guy behind our mediocre line and he might be out of the league by November. I just feel like you're more likely to get a guy who's cooked than get meaningful production when you're dealing with old RBs. We've seen this before (Drougns, Levens, Hillis, Cloud).
I'm fairly certain, yes.
Rashad Jennings was absolutely awful last year.
Blount isn't a star RB, but he's a tough runner who scored 18 times and rushed for over 1000 yards. A shade under 4 YPC isn't what you really want to see, but the bar Jennings set last year was quite low.
We won't need to lean on Blount as heavily as NE did. We aren't going to ask him to tote the rock 300 times.
I don't think guys like Dorsey Levens, who were about 3 years removed from their last productive NFL season when they got here, are apt comparisons here.
his TDs last year are meaningless when predicting what he's going to do going forward. And the total is a huge outlier compared to what he's done previously. The dropoff for Blount is coming...it's a question of when, not if. And I'd rather not be the team that finds out when. I'd also have big concerns about plucking what was essentially a role player from one of the best offenses in football. I'm thinking he didn't face a lot of fronts geared up to stop him (excluding short yardage situations obviously).