Guys,
Been having an interesting debate in our podcast, I have actually gotten my head ripped off by my co host on this topic.
I have been very supportive of the way Wayne Gallman has played and have made the comment while he is not nearly as talented as Saquon Barkley, his running style might fit the scheme that Jason Garrett runs and that I think that is part of the reason, the Giants are having more success running the ball this season.
I have linked in the podcast if anybody is interested in listening.
Curious for the thoughts on the board.
Link - (
New Window )
But if you’re a DC, you’re actively accounting for SB in a way you don’t have to for the Wayne Train. He’s not going to hit a HR, and SB can on any play. Gallman at the second level is 8-25 yards. Saquon is a potential TD.
SB may take time to get fully back to form after his knee. But a play action to him should suck up LBs like crazy. You saw the Steelers swarm to him and dare the pass to beat them, which at that point we couldn’t.
Finally, long term he’ll get paid in part - I think - because he’s also the face of the franchise, and they player football fans and TV producers want to watch. He sells ads, merch, and tickets. Not a lot of Gallman jerseys in the stands.
Quote:
Barkley is arguably the best receiver among the RB's in the NFL.
This is exactly it. I think the Giants need to utilize Barkley + Gallman like Kamara+Murray in New Orleans. It will make Barkley more, not less effective.
This is what I would like, although Barkley will get more rushes than Kamara does.
Funny thing is, this is the main reason why you keep a guy like Gallman, instead of thinking he is easily replaceable.
Imagine if they still had Perkins and Hilliman as backups instead of Gallman?
There have been several plays that if Barkley hits the same hole, he's taking it all the way.
Look, Gallman has been a solid back and he's grinding out yards, but his YPC isn't great and he leaves a lot of big plays on the field. He would be excellent as a complementary back. As the lead guy, he's solid but unspectacular.
Agreed!
I'm a huge Gallman fan; probably watched every game at Clemson.
When he came out I predicted he'd be a solid contributor for many years in the NFL; able to get the short yards, catch a 3rd down pass, etc. His obvious collegiate limitation was downfield speed; he seldom broke the "long one" on his own.
But don't sell the Wayne Train short. He was an every down back that set Clemson RB records for TDs and yards.
More significantly he led all college backs, including Saquan, in yards after contact. (Eventually he'd be brought down past the 2nd level).
He has now learned NFL pass pro (see the JJ report) and has to get used to NOT being the prime carrier.
Having said that I believe he has confirmed my pre draft opinion that he'd be a solid long term contributor. He can be the "homegrown" RB vet the NYG seem to always be searching for.
Quote:
Barkley does not. Gallman has been running right past the first guy that tackles Barkley for a three yard loss because Barkley STOPS when receiving handoff and loses all momentum. Giant offense has improved without Barkley's TFL's and it is very obvious. I hope Barkley is able to come back strong but how much can you expect from a RB that does not run inside or block ?
Do you just make shit up??
Out of Barkley's 2344 yards, over 1700, or almost 2/3rds of them come from runs inside the tackles! Now of course, most runs go inside the tackles - but to say he can't run inside is patently absurd.
I understand why you are a Barkley fanboy. He's fun to watch. You know what was not fun to watch ? His 1.8 yds per carry while healthy in first three games.
Quote:
In comment 15065691 averagejoe said:
Quote:
Barkley does not. Gallman has been running right past the first guy that tackles Barkley for a three yard loss because Barkley STOPS when receiving handoff and loses all momentum. Giant offense has improved without Barkley's TFL's and it is very obvious. I hope Barkley is able to come back strong but how much can you expect from a RB that does not run inside or block ?
Do you just make shit up??
Out of Barkley's 2344 yards, over 1700, or almost 2/3rds of them come from runs inside the tackles! Now of course, most runs go inside the tackles - but to say he can't run inside is patently absurd.
I understand why you are a Barkley fanboy. He's fun to watch. You know what was not fun to watch ? His 1.8 yds per carry while healthy in first three games.
And Gallman would have done much better? Did you even watch the Steelers game? He was getting hit 3 and 4 yards behind the LOS on every. Single. Play.
On the other hand, you've got SB who misses some holes, dances around in the backfield, and takes some TFLs but man can he make people miss, shake the last guy at the second level and take it to the house.
Is there room on the roster for both? Are there enough plays to go around for both? Can you run an offense effectively using both? Is SB going to worth the money to keep? Is GAllman worth the money to keep if we still have SB?
It's a good problem to have - but I'm really curious to see how the Giants front office and coaching staff sees this backfield shaping up in the short and long terms.
You should take a listen, we have a good debate on this.
Just a shitty, uninformed take.
I will point this out again. In the remainder of the bears game and the following two games, the RB's combined for 12 runs for losses.
Barkley was injured and unavailable to "dance", so can you explain that?
What I think it comes down to is, is it better to have the big play ability or the ability to move the chains? If moving the chains is more important, Gallman is the guy in THIS offense. Don't misinterpret, overall in a perfect world, it's a no brainer, you want Saquan in the backfield.
My co host and I argue about this and I do think Barkley is the better back, but it is definitely an interesting debate. You should take a listen if you get the chance.
Barkley and Gallman would make a great tandem next season, but I would venture there are college RBs that will be available late that can do the job Gallman is doing.
Which, as this thread goes on, I think is your bigger goal - to get people to listen to it.
Which, as this thread goes on, I think is your bigger goal - to get people to listen to it.
It is not my bigger goal, we have a ton of listeners that really like it and some very experienced in the tv production and podcast world helping us. I'm interested in the opinion. Sorry, you don't like it.
Year 2 - 1000+ yds rushing, 420+ yds receiving (only 13 games)
Done with a much worse line than Gallman has right now.
Gallman will get like half these numbers (actually less than half in receiving).
In addition Barkley's YPC is about 1 to 1.5 yds more (look it up). Also the defenses do not have to change their defense to handle Gallman, Barkley they do (which opens up other players).
There is no comparison really, Barkley behind this line now would gain about 1600 yds rushing for sure. I can't wait for next season
Quote:
podcast is a pretty tough listen.
Which, as this thread goes on, I think is your bigger goal - to get people to listen to it.
It is not my bigger goal, we have a ton of listeners that really like it and some very experienced in the tv production and podcast world helping us. I'm interested in the opinion. Sorry, you don't like it.
My opinion on the Gallman debate you are having in the pod is that "fit" isn't really the topic. It shouldn't be a question on whether or not Gallman is a better "fit". He isn't. If he were, he'd have some 100 yard games and put up stats like Barkley. He's been the beneficiary of improved blocking.
Going back to Garrett's schemes with RB's when he was OC, he utilizes them complementary, which is what he'd likely do when Barkley is healthy.
Gallman is doing a solid job. The side of the argument being lost is that people are acting as if Gallman is getting the tough yards and Barkley wouldn't. Thant's a strawman argument. Again, in 2018, Barkley led the league in yards after contact. He also led the league in fewest yards at first contact
Gallman has filled in admirably, but he’s limited as a runner, and as an athlete. The job title is exactly what he is: backup.
I think Barkley is able to adjust his style, so he can be successful. And I believe Garrett will adjust the offense to sue his strengths.
It is in fair to judge Barkley off of the first few weeks of the season. The team is completely different at this point in the year.
Gallman was shit on badly by this board.
Quote:
In comment 15065740 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
podcast is a pretty tough listen.
Which, as this thread goes on, I think is your bigger goal - to get people to listen to it.
It is not my bigger goal, we have a ton of listeners that really like it and some very experienced in the tv production and podcast world helping us. I'm interested in the opinion. Sorry, you don't like it.
My opinion on the Gallman debate you are having in the pod is that "fit" isn't really the topic. It shouldn't be a question on whether or not Gallman is a better "fit". He isn't. If he were, he'd have some 100 yard games and put up stats like Barkley. He's been the beneficiary of improved blocking.
Going back to Garrett's schemes with RB's when he was OC, he utilizes them complementary, which is what he'd likely do when Barkley is healthy.
Gallman is doing a solid job. The side of the argument being lost is that people are acting as if Gallman is getting the tough yards and Barkley wouldn't. Thant's a strawman argument. Again, in 2018, Barkley led the league in yards after contact. He also led the league in fewest yards at first contact
I don't necessarily disagree with you about Gallman vs Barkley. There is no doubt the offensive line has improved, but I do think Garrett's schemes favor a back that makes quick decisions and hits the hole hard. My concern is that Barkley is the type of back that is more patient and looks for the big play and can this line hold their blocks. It is an interesting debate and one to be honest, I go back and forth on. Furthermore, there is no doubt the Giants miss Barkley's big play ability to the plodding offense they are running now.
These stats pale compared to Barkley's, and this is what Gallman is being applauded for. Gallman is a solid back up RB, which is exactly how he has been used here.
Gallman was shit on badly by this board.
+1
I don't believe Gallmans pass blocking is better than Barkleys, not sure where this came from. Giants use Lewis when they really need the RB to block. I may agree the pass blocking is equivalent between Bark and Gallman, but that is it
Gallman has filled in admirably, but he’s limited as a runner, and as an athlete. The job title is exactly what he is: backup.
I think Barkley is able to adjust his style, so he can be successful. And I believe Garrett will adjust the offense to sue his strengths.
It is in fair to judge Barkley off of the first few weeks of the season. The team is completely different at this point in the year.
This.
He was hit the earliest of any back after getting the ball. Do you think that might be why he had all the negative carries
I will post it for a multiple time here. In the remainder of the Bears game and teh next two games, we had 12 runs for losses. Without Barkley. Don't you think the blocking might have been an issue?
Gallman is not a throwaway. He's a solid backup. I'd love to have him here at a reasonable price
BUT - I ain't giving that guy a long term Kamara/CMC/Zeke type contract until I'm convinced he's the same player before the injuries.
I am not counting on him coming back 100% like it's a slam dunk no doubt about it type scenario. As Giants fans, we have all been down this road before.
Not sure when we saw Gallman pick up a blitz, since he is ineffective on obvious passing downs and usually Lewis comes in. As I stated above, Gallman is barely used in the passing game. The stats show it, and I have him in fantasy and see it there too. I think this is just an opinion. Yes Barkley had pass blocking issues, and it was very public that he was working to improve in this area. I do not think Gallman is any better. There is a big difference in pass blocking on down 1, which basically means helping someone out, than picking up a blitzing LB on obvious passing plays. Both players can do the first one, its the latter they both (and many backs) struggle with.
I think I am clearly biased towards SB, however I don't think there is any area that Gallman is better than Barkley at. Barkley is a unique back. I believe the coaching believes this too, just based on how both players were used.
Quote:
Barkley does not. Gallman has been running right past the first guy that tackles Barkley for a three yard loss because Barkley STOPS when receiving handoff and loses all momentum. Giant offense has improved without Barkley's TFL's and it is very obvious. I hope Barkley is able to come back strong but how much can you expect from a RB that does not run inside or block ?
Do you just make shit up??
Out of Barkley's 2344 yards, over 1700, or almost 2/3rds of them come from runs inside the tackles! Now of course, most runs go inside the tackles - but to say he can't run inside is patently absurd.
I don't think he's saying he can't run inside the tackles....obviously he does - plays go that way.
But there's no denying that Barkley has a tendency to dance and simply at times not take the 2-3 yards that are there......sometimes you have to take what's there and not hit a HR on every play.
I think an announcer on Fox said that in the Chicago game..........
Am I misrepresenting the words?
Common denominator is a bad OL..
Quote:
I hope Barkley is able to come back strong but how much can you expect from a RB that does not run inside or block ?
Am I misrepresenting the words?
No he literally said that lol......and I indicated he obviously goes between the tackles. I'm saying that his reference to stopping has to do with his Barkely having a tendency to dance (we saw this with Barry Sanders).
I see Barkely as a guy who will always get hit for a lot of losses, whether guys are crashing down the line (as in the Pitt game) or not.
I kinda agree with this.
I don't think you need to pay $3 mil for Gallman when you can find a similar skill set from a 4th or 5th rd draft pick.
That's FMIC, not me............
But having said that, I agree with the sentiment that you can get a similar back in the draft, mid-rounds.
You only bring him back a very reasonable price.
Finished 2nd with 56 broken tackles on runs
Finished 1st with 38 missed tackles on receptions
Finished 2nd with 56 broken tackles on runs
Finished 1st with 38 missed tackles on receptions
Well...if Saquon would just hit the open hole he wouldn't have to break so many damn tackles :)
JK - Saquon is a beast.
Quote:
And is having a solid year, but let's be honest, you can pick up a guy with his production in the later rounds of the draft pretty easily.
I kinda agree with this.
I don't think you need to pay $3 mil for Gallman when you can find a similar skill set from a 4th or 5th rd draft pick.
I almost agree. I don't think resigning Gallman is a crucial decision as you can see Morris is almost as complete a back. I point to the Giants own pick of Paul Perkins a 5th round pick out of UCLA. I don't think there is a guarantee on ANY pick but you know what you have in Gallman. The tougher question and its one we can put off for a year or so, is Barkley. Paying him or not. Two injuries in 3 years. He's top 3 RB in the league and will most likely deserved to be paid. What do we do then.....
In terms of how much that is going to cost the Giants when SB becomes eligible.
I think it's going to take the Giants 2 years to really figure out where SB is, and that's assuming he's back for the start of next year...which, as I said before, I'm not saying is a slam dunk.
I can't link directly to the tackles/outside stats. It is part of a subscription service. I'll see if I can find them elsewhere
Saquon splits. Tabs have the other two years - ( New Window )
UMMM...Zeke is WAY better than MBIII ever was...
If you look at the tandem while Garrett was OC, it was Barber and Felix Jones. Neither of them ever got 100 yards, Barber averaged about .5 YPC less than Jones and Jones was the main receiving threat out of the backfield.
Put those two together and you have Barkley. That's what I was talking about this not being a "fit" issue for Garrett or a particular style. He's used different backs to do different things because he didn't have one that was all-purpose
Barkley was stood up in instant what seemed like many times a game. But Barkley is also a cut back and get-to-edge type back, and that contributes to many of those TFLs as well.
I never thought the Barkley pick was the tragedy some make it out to be, even as I am skeptical his prime will coincide with the other stars aligning to make a championship run.
I posted this in another thread, I think right now is actually a great time to extend him.
Extending Barkley - ( New Window )