News Archives

Agent of New York Giants’ Domenik Hixon “Hoping to Finalize a Deal Very Soon”

February 28th, 2012 at 2:16 PM
By Dan Benton

Mario Manningham may be on his way out of the Big Apple, but Domenik Hixon isn't. The wide receiver's agent, Eric Metz, told Mike Garafolo of the Newark Star-Ledger that the two sides are discussing a deal that could, potentially, be signed soon.

"[We're] hoping to finalize a contract very soon," Metz said. "We expect him to sign with the Giants."

Hixon missed 14 games last year after tearing his ACL in week two against the St. Louis Rams, and missed all of the 2010 season after tearing the very same ACL. However, the six-year veteran fully expects to return to football at 100% and believes he can contribute.

In 48 career games with the Giants, Hixon has hauled in 63 passes for 838 yards and four touchdowns. His real value comes on special teams as a return man, where he's returned both a kick and punt for a touchdown – the only player on the Giants to accomplish that feat in the last six years.

Prior to the 2011 season, Hixon signed a one-year deal worth $600,000 (plus a $250,000 roster bonus).

Also…

Tags: Domenik Hixon, Football, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

31 Responses to “Agent of New York Giants’ Domenik Hixon “Hoping to Finalize a Deal Very Soon””

  1.  BigBlueGiants says:

    BigBlueGiants says:
    February 28, 2012 at 2:23 PM

    Kujo, I don’t really have a beef with Fleener at all. i think he’s a good player.

    This offense isn’t really TE friendly. And I just personally don’t think that there is a TE worth of a pick at 32.

    • Dave CoughlinFoxlin21 says:

      What does this offense isn’t TE friendly mean. Ballard had some great games before he went down. Boss has some great seasons before he left as did Shockey. Just because they don’t line up as a WO doesn’t mean it’s not a TE friendly offense.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I think this belief amonst some that the we don’t use our TEs is a false. The truth is we use our TEs in a limited way because we have had limited talent and that position since Shockey left and use our TEs accordingly.

  2.  GOAT56 says:

    kujo says:
    February 28, 2012 at 2:08 PM
    The Giants webpage posted a list of “expert” mock drafts as of now:

    Mel Kiper, ESPN Insider- Dwayne Allen, TE, Clemson
    Pete Prisco, CBSSports.com- Coby Fleener, TE, Stanford
    Rob Rang, Sports Xchange- Mike Adams, OT, Ohio State
    Charles Davis, NFL Network – Dont’a Hightower, ILB, Alabama
    Chad Reuter, NFL Network- Dwayne Allen, TE, Clemson
    Charley Casserly, NFL Network- Zach Brown, OLB, North Carolina
    Bucky Brooks, NFL.com- Dont’a Hightower, ILB, Alabama
    Don Banks, SI.com- Coby Fleener, TE, Stanford

    •  norm says:

      That little list points out the absurdity of the whole “mock draft” process, which is based almost exclusively on perceived team needs and rarely accounts for the front office’s drafting history or even the quality of the players at the positions of need.

      Had any of the aforementioned “experts” bothered to do anything more than the most cursory surface analysis, they would not have mocked any of the TEs or LBs to the Giants. The only name on that list that even makes a shred of sense is the OT Adams (although I would not be crazy about the pick)

      That said, those expert mocks are fun even if they have little to no predictive value. The best one, I believe, is the Dallas beat writer Rick Gosselin’s which he typically releases a few days before the draft. He consistently has the best record for accuracy in predicting how the actual draft will go. But I think he’s pretty well connected and actually bases his mock on what he’s hearing from his sources inside the various front offices.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I would bet a lot money we don’t select any of those players or positions.

    • Chad EldredChad says:

      The number one thing you can gain from mock drafts is a better understanding of why the guys who do them don’t have jobs in football.

  3. Chad EldredChad says:

    I don’t know about anyone else here, but I am extremely grateful that for some time now we haven’t been subjected the homoerotic picture of Tuck and Fewell embracing.

  4. Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

    By all means bring Hixon back at a small salary and let him compete for return duties and one of the depth receivers. I don’t think he will win the #3 spot except, maybe, as a short-term place-holder for a younger guy who needs time to get ready to take the position (Jernigan, a draft pick, or Thomas).

    Frankly, I love this kid and hope he can come back, although I am somewhat skeptical that he’ll make the final roster. But why the agonizing over Reese’s willingness to sign guys with ACL injuries to bring back to camp? I’m sure that each will have passed rigorous medical evaluations, and I’m pretty sure each will have a contract that doesn’t cost much if they cannot play. In Hixon’s case it actually looked like he did not suffer a full tear as he came dowwn with that great catch. I thought the same for Thomas and Goff. Frankly, the one that most concerns me is Goff’s because a bad ACL could be a real problem for a linebacker who has to quickly change directions while taking some blocks from multiple directions. It’s for that reason that I think Reese will definitely sign Blackburn again. He needs insurance against Goff’s going down and probably doesn’t want to count on Jones or Herzlich until one or the other proves he’s up to the job.

  5. Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

    As to the free agent tight ends, I think a number of things:

    1) I think the Giants have deemphasized the tight end because they wanted to establish the running game AND because they have not had a real receiving threat who would have induced Gilbride and Coughlin to make significant use of him since Shockey went south on us in his last two seasons in Blue;

    2) I think that, especially if Manningham goes and they conclude that they have a “better” tight end than they do #3 receiver, the Giants’ offense will shift and that tight end will become a bigger target than has been the case of late;

    3) Having said that, I do NOT rule out the Giants’ taking a tight end with the #64 pick, and I certainly don’t rule out their going after Carlson; but

    4) I think Bennett will be, and should be, the primary target because he SHOULD be cheaper and because there are some drops by him on tape that may reduce his price further and because he fits the Giants a bit better in their CURRENT plan and would actually be a better “fit” with Ballard and Beckum if and when they return (one of them is all receiver, one is a kind of poor man’s all-around TE, and Bennett would be a solid blocker with receiver upside, making them a good trio….Carlson would give them two receivers and one guy who isn’t yet a great blocker….I know Carlson blocks too, but that is not his forte, and in any case 280 pounds beats 250 pounds as a blocker every time).

    Basically, while losing Manningham would be a blow, I think the brain trust will assume that with Jernigan, a new draft pick, or possibly even Thomas or Hixon, they can replace a lot of his production and stick with the idea of using the wideouts to spread the defense while maintaining the running game as a legit threat that succeeds much of the time. Under that scenario the Giants’ tight ends will always have to block first except in special packages. They’ll try Beckum in those, but I don’t think they’d pay Carlson what he’ll get just to play in the occasional special package. Bennett just makes so much more sense, unless they’re going to change their approach on offense.

  6. Chad EldredChad says:

    I’m a bit puzzled why the ’49ers have signed Ahmad Brooks to a long term, reasonably expensive deal. Not that he isn’t a decent player, but at the price they are paying I’m not sure how much sense it makes. With Willis and Bowman they could potentially have a ton of money spent on LB’s before Brooks’ contract expires. In today’s game I’m not sure that spending a ton an the LB corps makes a lot of sense. You can only pay decent money to so many guys on the roster. I think I would have taken my chances and let Brooks walk. They have a QB to sign, I think if I were them I would want to sort that out first. They certainly don’t want to franchise Alex Smith, but if he hits the market you run the risk of some other team deciding he could be their guy. Even if the risk is small it’s not one I would want to take. Smith leaves and suddenly you’re looking at Kyle Orton on opening day.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      3-4 is a different defensive scheme. Smith is under his rookie contract for a while and Willis just sign an extension. They are keeping their strength together just like we will at DL. Their LBs can play every down, just remove a DL player and they can match up versus most spread teams. Brooks is a pass rusher and he goes well with the Smith “brothers”. It makes sense to me.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        Smith leaving is no concern. Smith needs SF even more than SF needs him. with what they ask him to do other QBs could replace Smith.

        • Chad EldredChad says:

          It’s not likely, I agree, but do you really want to bank your entire short term success on the fact that no other team would pay him. I wouldn’t. All it takes is one GM to think “we could win with Alex Smith”, and he’s gone. I understand keeping the D together, but they have zero impact receivers and Carlos Rogers is a FA as well. Personally I’m kind of glad they made this move, it makes it more difficult for them to address their other issues. This season was a near perfect set of events for SF, it will tough to replicate that.

  7.  Samardzija says:

    Gotta say, Im pretty unimpressed by this years TE class. Wouldnt give a single one of them a first round grade. Id take Fleener, Allen and maybe Egnew at #64. Thats pretty much it imo

  8.  jfunk says:

    First of all: LOL! Just heard McNabb on NFL Live say that the Redskins won’t be interested in Manning because…get this…they won’t change their offense to fit a QB like “you’re supposed to”. He knows because “they didn’t do it for me”. Yep…McNabb and Manning…same scenario. Good to know Donovan is as delusional as ever.

    FF55 – Regarding the worry about JR and the ACL Club. It’s not that he’s willing to take a change on any of these guys. Every one of them have strong merit in a vacuum. It just seems that taking that chance on SO MANY of them all at the same time might be rolling the dice a little too much.

    Of course, any deals that can be voided in camp with no hit don’t count. We’ll have to wait and see how may of these deals actually get done and what they are for before having that conversation. Just seems like the list of ACL tears we kind of expect to be back and productive is a bit long.

  9.  giantsfan says:

    I say bring back the Shank. He was always great for us.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: