NY Giants scouting

by nms on Feb 4, 2008 12:20 AM EST

The Giant's did a really good job on getting contributions on the cheap from some players, something I though baseball fans might like to hear.

The best part is several players from the Giants most recent draft were contributors, and everyone blasted their draft at the time as being mediocre to poor.

After losing Tiki Barber, the Giants did a great job of making "RB by committee" work this year instead of cashing out for one big name back. Between Jacobs, Derrick Ward and Bradshaw they got 3 good backs in the late rounds.
I don't know if that is great coaching, great scouting or both.. probably both.
All three were kind of diamonds in the rough.

Jacobs has always been considered talented, even out of HS, but he has always had some obstacle in the way. He was too thuggish and stupid coming out of a Louisiana HS, despite dominating the whole state, for LSU to offer a scholly. Auburn, having no standards, did offer but Jacobs didn't qualify. So he went to a Kansas JUCO for 2 years and then transferred to Auburn. At Auburn of course he was stuck behind two top picks in Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams. So he transferred to Southern Illinois. There not only did he lose exposure playing at a lower level but he still spilt carries with another great back (though not Brown/Williams great) - plus his body is more TE than RB - so he fell to round 4.

Ward was good as a freshman at Fresno State but got injured and then academically ineligible.
He transferred to some NAIA college in Kansas or Texas or something and dominated but at a VERY low level of competition. But, it was NAIA, so whoo-dee-doo. He was either a 6/7th rounder or undrafted.

I don't know Bradshaw's deal exactly but he was an unheralded 7th rounder from a crap team. So props to the Giants scouts for following these guys all the way down to the lowest levels in the most remote areas and not letting em fall through the cracks.

Plus the Giants had a few other low profile guys contribute.
David Tyree was a 6th rounder in '03 who worked his way up on special teams.
Kevin Boss was evidently unrecruited out of even HS by anyone, despite being big and fast. He got some pre-draft pub but still fell to the 5th round. Good job by the Giants scouts to get on someone from Western Oregon College.
Their starting FB, Hedgecock, was a waiver pickup who played as much DE as FB/RB in college. Of course his college coach, John Bunting at UNC, wouldn't let Willie Parker start.

So, again, props to the Giants for identifying diamonds in the rough ("undervalued" players to use Moneyball terms) in the later rounds. And prop to the coaching staff for developing them.

Tweet Comment 36 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Bradshaw

kicked out of UVA for stealing a PS2. Also had some injury when he ran the 40 yard dash.

Todd Frazier for President

by FrazierFan on Feb 4, 2008 1:02 AM EST reply actions

did anyone else find it weird

that Jeremy Shockey was watching the game from a luxury box and drinking as opposed to watching from the sidelines?

by Galt on Feb 4, 2008 9:34 AM EST reply actions

me and my friends were talking about that

It was pretty questionable. I wonder if maybe the NFL rules are different for the Super Bowl, since there are so many sideline pass applications, and inactive players can't dress and stand? I hope, and doubt, that that is the case. It would be stupid by the NFL.

If he chose to sit up there and pound the Coors that is pretty lame...

by nms on Feb 4, 2008 11:12 AM EST up reply actions

Injured Reserve...

I believe that many teams won't allow players that are on injured reserve to be on the sidelines. The Giants may be one of them.

by calig23 on Feb 4, 2008 12:25 PM EST up reply actions

interview

he was interviewed very early during the 6 hour pregame, and he said he planned on watching from the box for his own safety for not being able to get out of the way quickly, because he didn't want to put his teammates in danger for the same reason, and because he didn't want to jinx the team's success without him on the sideline...he did walk out onto the field before going up to the box...

by biggentleben on Feb 4, 2008 5:03 PM EST up reply actions

LSU's standards

Must have slipped since they supposedly took the high road on Jacobs. See Ryan Perrilloux who is on the blotter almost as much as he is in the end zone.

by Duman on Feb 4, 2008 12:35 PM EST reply actions

bullS... Perriloux has

had all sorts of scandelous rumors run around him but he hasn't ever had any criminal problems.

I'm pretty sure the most serious thing on his record right now is some sort of a drinking ticket... which makes him like 35% of under 21 college males

by nms on Feb 4, 2008 2:11 PM EST up reply actions

re: scouting

Ernie Accorsi

by HumboltThunderbolt on Feb 4, 2008 1:29 PM EST reply actions

RB

Not only did the Giants do well with Jacobs, Ward, and Bradshaw, but they also had Ryan Grant before trading him to Green Bay in early September.

Who needs Tiki with all those guys around?

by jonk1982 on Feb 4, 2008 1:35 PM EST reply actions

just remember

Eli doesn't have what it takes to win a Super Bowl and he'll never get there... er, uhm.... ahhhh...

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 1:56 PM EST up reply actions

Romo

is better than Eli.

Is Trent Dilfer better than Dan Marino just because Dilfer has a ring?

Eli had a solid playoffs, but in none of his games did he have fantastic stats.

You have a very weak premise.

by Galt on Feb 4, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions

While I agree

with the Dilfer analogy, I think Eli is quite good, not saying you think Eli = Dilfer... I also think that Romo is helped by being in the right system at the right time - not to mention 4 of his 5 lineman are going to Honolulu and he had more stability with his running game this year. Romo has the edge right now, but when all is said and done, it wouldn't surprise me if Eli is viewed as being the better of the two.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 2:33 PM EST up reply actions

Meh...

I don't think that changes things much in the overall scheme for me. Montana/Young had Rice, Marino had Clayton/Duper- no one holds that against those guys.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

nit picking

put Manning on Romo's team and he would put up worse numbers than Romo.

Put Romo on Manning's team and he would put up better numbers than Manning.

Romo is a better QB. Manning is good, and obviously had a very good playoff run.

You may bring up the "choking in the playoffs" to imply that Manning is better for some reason, but it's a very weak premise. Arod, Bonds, Marino, all of them had some bad performances in small samples in the playoffs.

It doesn't mean that Derek Jeter is better than A-rod because Jeter has all sorts of rings and done well in the playoffs while Arod has none and has stunk in the playoffs.

by Galt on Feb 4, 2008 3:14 PM EST up reply actions

Now you're

getting just as bad as him. You can't present that QB scenario-switch as fact. There's no way to substaintiate it and it's apples to oranges to begin with. Any decent QB that plays behind 4 pro bowlers, has a decent running game and plays with one of the top 5 WR's to ever play the game is going to look better than he actually is. I'd be REALLY intersted to have seen Eli in Romo's shoes this year.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 4:09 PM EST up reply actions

i think

your way off here.

first, dallas had much better skill players and offense line play this year.

owens had a fantastic year, witten had an even better year, and thier O-line played out of its mind

burress was injuired for a majority of the year and couldnt practice most of the time, toomer was incredibly incosistent all year. smith was injured for a long time, and was a rookie. jacobs missed alot of time. the offensive line was good, but not as good as the cowboys.

if you are taling about this year, i am fully confident eli would put up the same if not better #'s than romo this year

by bmxstreetrider86 on Feb 4, 2008 5:11 PM EST up reply actions

Comp

Eli and Romo had a comparable amount of pass attempts 529 for Eli to 520 for Romo. Sacks were Eli 27 Romo 24. Romo had a 64.4% completion rate and a 97.4 QB rating. Eli had a 56.1% completion rate with a 73.9 QB rating.

by JFP on Feb 4, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions

ok ill

and did we gloss over the fact that romo has one of the best lines in football protecting him, with one of the best WR and TE's in the game

while eli played behind a good line, but burress plyed the whole year on a torn ankle ligament, smith missed a lot of time, toomer was inconsistent, and on top of that Eli was hurt after week 1 and played through it.

you cant compare those two in a vacuum

by bmxstreetrider86 on Feb 4, 2008 11:37 PM EST up reply actions

what

you really don't think so?

by nms on Feb 4, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions

I've always thought

Eli was better than Romo. Romo has a lot more help, and much better coaching.

Todd Frazier for President

by FrazierFan on Feb 5, 2008 10:08 AM EST up reply actions

Hahaha

Go look at completion percentages and QB ratings for the last two years, and you will see that Romom is the better QB. And don't give us this crap about Romo having better receivers. Toomer, Plax, and Shockey, are very comparable to Owens, Crayton or Glenn, and Witten. The Giants have also had a better running game the past two years. For me its a case closed. Romo is the better QB.

by JFP on Feb 4, 2008 3:46 PM EST up reply actions

+1

the two-second attention span and general reasoning abilities of the American public makes me want to vomit.

congrats to Eli, but he's not even in the same ballpark as Romo at this point in his career. it's like comparing really elite apples to shitty, marginal apples.

oh -- and counting number of vowels in two QB's mother's maiden names would do as much to resolve a "who's a better quarterback?" controversy as counting their Super Bowl rings.

by bleedjaxblue on Feb 4, 2008 6:14 PM EST up reply actions

Huh...

Where you may want to vomit over attention span, reasoning is what gets me. Comparing those stats for these two and somehow thinking it's "case closed" is stupid at best.

Different offensive schemes - Tom Coughlin is to Don Coryell as Phil Niekro is to Nolan Ryan.
Different O-line - not even close here really.
Different supporting cast - RB/WR/TE.

Romo has the advantage in all three. To me, it's as stupid saying wins are the best indicator of a pitchers ability.

Look at how average Brady looked last night. The Pats didn't seem to play their normal scheme as well as Brady getting a lot pressure made him look very meh - certainly not like someone who threw TD's at will this year. Another example would be Rex Grossman. In the 2006 season, when he had time and a good gameplan he looked nothing short of spectacular, racking up the most games with a QB rating over 100. When teams got to him and/or they switched things up in the play-calling, he was nothing short of atrocious. A QB's success has much more to do with his team mates / scheme than people want to admit.

Eli has tremendous raw talent that has been transforming into refined talent just fine. He's every bit as talented, if not more so than Romo IMO. Once he gets in a more open offensive system that lets him play to his strengths, he's going to prove a lot of this to BS. Don't get me wrong, I like Romo. It just irks me when people sell Eli short based on the dumbest shit - and I HATE the F'n Giants.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 6:39 PM EST up reply actions

personally

i think you give some good reasons why it's difficult to say one player is better than another in any football game. i just don't think Eli Manning has shown himself to be anything special at any point in his career, and it's a joke that he'd be discussed as a top 5 quarterback (which is what Romo is), just because he ceased to melt down for a single 5-game streak during his career.

as for the supporting cast argument, the offensive line didn't look all that good when Bledsoe was behind center for the Cowboys (16 sacks in 6 games in 2006). the line "blocked" better when they found someone with the pocket presence and mobility to allow them to make some mistakes.

oh -- and Witten? despite all his talent, he was a non-factor with Bledsoe in the picture. again, in '06, he was relegated to protection until Romo's mobility allowed them to open up the offense.

as far as supporting cast goes, i'd say Jacobs/Bradshaw are slightly better than Barber/Jones (though this is so close, i'd be willing to call it a dead heat).

T.O. is a little better than Plax, Witten and little better than Shockey, and Glenn better than Toomer (though Toomer is significantly better than Crayton). however, none of these matchups are so uneven that it's worth mentioning, considering how uneven the matchup appears to be between Romo and Eli.

as far as coaching styles go? ehhhh -- maybe. i'm always willing to buy the argument -- even if you're not substantiating it by telling me HOW the two are different/why that would lead to Eli's stats being suppressed and/or Romo's enhanced. and it's also worth mentioning that Romo had entirely different coaches in 2006 and 2007, while he's been better statistically than Eli in both.

as for "tremendous raw talent" in Eli -- i don't really see it. at all. Peyton's got it. Eli? he's well above average. but, really, i'm not sure what attribute you consider "tremendous." when you throw that in with a history bad decision-making and game management, i'm not sure how you can decide that this guy is elite anything.

also, Rex Grossman is a whole different story, and was always an illusion, but, knowing you're a Bears fan who never saw them for their flaws, i'll leave that out of this......

by bleedjaxblue on Feb 4, 2008 6:59 PM EST up reply actions

Hmm...

I'd be more willing to buy into your side, if it wasn't for 2 lines, which really destroys/detracts from what you have to say.

"T.O. is a little better than Plax"

Puh. Leease. TO is one of the greatest WR's to ever play. Plax is about average / slightly above among current players. TO is a HOF'er - Plax is 2-time All-Big Ten.

"Rex Grossman is a whole different story, and was always an illusion, but, knowing you're a Bears fan who never saw them for their flaws"

You don't have more 100+ rated games than every other QB due some dumb luck illusion. He wasn't playing over head. When he was put in the right situation, he was able to play very well. People only say otherwise because they only saw the "Bad Rex" ESPN loved showing all the time. If you saw the "Good Rex" games or even some of the so-so games he had (I'm not talking just highlights), you wouldn't be saying that. Being a Bear fan has nothing to do with it. I cry foul and bitch long and loud when there is something I don't like coming from the Bears.

Sure Bledsoe got sacked more. Michael Vick he was not and he generally sucked towards the end. He held the ball too long and Romo has better wheels than Drew ever dreamed of - that's just not a good arguement. If I had to choose one - I'd probably take Romo because he's more mobile, but the gap isn't as wide in my mind as most people seem to think it is.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 7:28 PM EST up reply actions

yeah....maybe i undersold T.O.

but i'm not sure the career argument is worth making. i think the gap between T.O. and Plax is much smaller at this point, as Plax has really come into his own. in my mind, he's easily within the top 5 to top 8 receiver in football. how much better can T.O really be than that? it's certainly not like T.O. is a whole different type of animal here, like he was at the turn of the millennium.

as for Rex, i've seen a lot, lot, lot of his games. you notice that the Bears got a lot of nationally televised games in the past two years? he takes a lot of risks. when, in any game, those risks turn up roses, you end up with a lot of phenomenal-looking games. when they don't? you're left with this year/the end of last year's Rex Grossman.

as for Bledsoe getting sacked more -- yeah, he was susceptible to it. but you just suggested that: 1) anyone in Romo's system would excel, and 2) anyone with Romo's O-line wouldn't get sacked. clearly, that's not the case. they needed someone with Romo's skillset to allow their skillplayers to excel. (incidentally, Michael Vick probably isn't the best example of someone getting sacked less, considering he went down more frequently than Bledsoe....but that's a real aside.)

by bleedjaxblue on Feb 4, 2008 9:51 PM EST up reply actions

pickin nits at this point

but I'm bored...

TO is still head and shoulders above Plax at this point IMO, second only to Moss right now.

2008 Comparison:

T.O. - thrown to 143 times for 81 rec. / 1355 yards / 16.7 avg. 15 TD

Plax - thrown to 140 times for 70 rec. / 1025 yards / 14.6 avg. 12 TD

For what it's worth, no one came close to T.O. in avg. that had 50 catches or more other than Edwards at 16.1. T.O. also played one less game in the reg season and still had better numbers than Plax if you include the playoffs. I like Plax - but he's not on that level. The gap may not be what it once was, but it's still sizable as T.O. is still a beast running after the catch. He was 11th in my FFL this year - Owens was 2nd behind Moss's crazy year.

Back to Rex - as the health of Chicago's O-line went, so went Rex. Last year he did force the ball at times - what QB in his first full year doesn't? Chicago's O-line was horrid this year, Benson sucks dog balls and Ron Turner doesn't adjust his game plan for shit. Not sayin Rex is blameless here, but he sure wasn't given a lot to work with.

The Mike Vick was a reference to speed - not # of sacks. Bledsoe was a clod even in his younger years. Seems like yesterday the Ryan Leaf / Bledsoe debate was going on. Man time flies.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 10:39 PM EST up reply actions

definitely

T.O. had a phenomenal year (and also missed the very end of it). on the other hand, Plax almost all of this year with bad injuries. he was pretty unstoppable early in the season. of course, i guess that's all part of the game -- and what Eli v. Romo had to deal with on the day-to-day.

by bleedjaxblue on Feb 4, 2008 11:58 PM EST up reply actions

also....

....T.O. had Tony Romo throwing to him, not that sucker Eli Manning ;)

by bleedjaxblue on Feb 4, 2008 11:59 PM EST up reply actions

O-line is closer than you think

Eli may eventually be better than Romo; you're right that he has the talent to be. But I don't think he's quite that good yet.

The Giants offensive line has been absolutely dominant over the last half season, especially during the playoff run. The Patriots pressured Eli about as much as anyone has lately, and they didn't get to him much.

I agree though that Eli would put up better numbers in a more open system. The Giants tended to get very conservative with even a small lead (as they did yesterday). But, still, the Giants biggest weakness much of the season was at QB (well that and DB early on). Most of these games you'd go in knowing they're going to win the battle at the line of scrimmage, on both sides of the ball, with the biggest question being whether Eli will make enough mistakes to give the game away.

by acerimusdux on Feb 4, 2008 9:02 PM EST up reply actions

also

consider some of the numbers I posted earlier and the Giants o-line isn't getting enough respect. They gave up 27 sacks for Eli, while the Cowboys line gave up 24 with Romo, in about the same amount of pass attempts. Once again I will say it, Eli had more pass attempts than Romo, how can anyone say the Giants offense was less wide open. Also, over those pass attempts Eli was significantly worse in completion % and QB rating.

by JFP on Feb 4, 2008 11:00 PM EST up reply actions

How

Coughlin's team is more dink-and-dunk typically. More 3 and five step drops. Romo does more bootleg and shotgun stuff that allows routes to develop farther down field. I don't think you point to just sacks and draw any firm conclusions. Hurried/knocked down/thrown away numbers really need to be part of this conversation.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 4, 2008 11:28 PM EST up reply actions

Dink and Dunk offense

Doesn't really help Eli in this argument. If he can only complete 56% of his passes in a dink and dunk style offense, that looks even worse.

by JFP on Feb 5, 2008 9:20 AM EST up reply actions

Meh...

If I know the ball isn't likely to go more than 15 yards down field, I bring up my safeties, have my corners play tight/bump and run and keep 8 in the box at all times that isn't an obvious passing down. Shit gets pretty congested.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Feb 5, 2008 10:10 AM EST up reply actions

ummm.....

this scouting is not a giants exclusive....the pats have done much the same...so have many teams...a real salary cap forces teams that want to succeed to invest heavily in their scouting to be able to outachieve the other guys on an equal footing....

unlike in baseball where teams like oakland and minnesota and the like invest heavily in scouting so they can find a place at a table completely set against them...putting every team on an even team spending level forces good scouting to maintain success...

by biggentleben on Feb 4, 2008 5:08 PM EST reply actions