News Archives

Brandon Jacobs “Not Willing to Sell His Soul” to Remain with New York Giants

February 29th, 2012 at 10:23 AM
By Dan Benton

Running back Brandon Jacobs want to remain with the New York Giants; he wants to retire a member of Big Blue. That's something he's remained certain and steadfast about since the conclusion of Super Bowl XLVI. But while appearing at a Play 60 event on Wednesday morning, the bruiser made it very clear there is a limit to his loyalty.

"I want to stay in New York a whole lot. But I'm not willing to sell my soul," Jacobs said. "If the Giants want it to work out – it will. If they don't, it won't."

Jacobs is due a $500,000 roster bonus in March and is currently on the books for $4.4 million in 2012. As the clear #2 running back on a team struggling to get themselves under the cap, Jacobs will either have to take a pay cut or be set loose. This is something he realizes and accepts, and has already said he's willing to re-work his deal…if it's fair.

"As long as it’s fair,” he said in mid-February. “There’s something that can be done. I do put a lot of hard work and dedication into what I do as well. But as long as it’s fair, things can happen.”

While in Indianapolis for the NFL Combine, the Giants met with representatives for Jacobs to discuss the situation, but did not come to an immediate resolution.

The Giants have until March 13th to shed salary and get under the cap, which will possibly be lower than initially expected.

Also…

Facebook Twitter Plusone Pinterest Linkedin Digg Delicious Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Posterous Email

Tags: Brandon Jacobs, Football, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

37 Responses to “Brandon Jacobs “Not Willing to Sell His Soul” to Remain with New York Giants”

  1. Terence CAVILLGIANTT says:

    Excuse my ignorance but – going back to Hixon – if the Giants sign him they must be pretty sure that he is recovered and he has his speed back . So , that would definitely take the pressure of resigning Manningham , no ?

    •  jfunk says:

      That depends on WHAT they sign him to. If they give him any guaranteed money, it would likely mean they are very confident in his recovery.

      If they sign him to a deal that allows them to cut him before the season with little to no hit, then it basically means nothing other than they are offering him a “courtesy try out”.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        Honestly, a mostly non guaranteed type of deal is what Hixon has to sign. Look at all the free agent WRs, even guys like Thomas. Imagine where someone like Hixon is in the peeking order.

  2. Terence CAVILLGIANTT says:

    Also , as far as free agency – if the teams are not sure of the cap level , except in a few cases for those teams who are well under , teams like the Giants who are close to the cap limit are not going to be giving out contracts except at minimum levels . I would expect to see a far greater pool of average players looking for jobs later on . This is exactly the type of situation that Reese likes and he can pick up players at minimum guaranteed contracts a la Kawika Mitchell . So we will be guessing for a L O N G time while free agency plays out .
    Also , again excuse my ignorance , but is there a time limit to when players have to be signed or can be asked to renegotiate . What I mean is for example – could they go to Eli and ask him to renegotiate so that there would be money to pay someone maybe even a BJ ?

  3.  GOAT56 says:

    Samardzija – I do think if there’s on Jimmy Graham this year it’s Egnew. Funny as a blocker he’s probably just as raw as Graham was. He doesn’t seem like our type of TE but he good easily turn out to be the best of the TEs.

    The late TEs I saw that I think could fit us and have some upside are Kroger -Michigan and Ford – Miami. Thoughts on these prospects?

  4.  jfunk says:

    Slight aside, but it seems relevant while we’re in off season “contract talk” mode.

    I have a problem with the largely accepted thinking in sports that guys who go after the money are “selfish” and if they were “smart” they’d want to be on a winning team even if it meant less cash.

    I personally see this as the exact opposite. “Winning” is about nothing but bragging rights. Money is about taking care of your family. And yes, you can always use “more money”, even if you’re not seeking opulence. That money could give lifetime advantages your family for generations to come if it helps grand kids and great grand kids get college educations and/or first homes without loans, etc…which give them a big head start in life and puts them in position to do the same for their own children.

    Let’s drop the scenario into a different profession. You’re a roofer. You have two job offers on the table…Mike’s Roofing and Bob’s Roofing. Mike’s roofing is offering you $75K to do your job. Bob’s roofing is offering you $50K, BUT they are the biggest company in the area, they regularly take out local full color advertisements showing pictures of their employees, and they ALWAYS win the softball league championship.

    Now go tell your wife that you’re taking the job at Bob’s because you “want to be a winner”.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I agree in general. But I think sometime players look at short term money compared to long term money. The classic example is Steve Smith. He made more money last year but risked his future money. If he had finished last year healthy, even if just plays part of rotation he would be in postion for more money long term this year. I(as did others) said it when he signed with Philly. Players do sometimes make bad business decisions while trying to “feed” their families.

  5. Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

    Yeah, yeah, yeah….the cap “might be lower than expected”. If Dee Smith had been competent he’d have insisted on behalf of his members that with a new TV deal kicking in by 2014 (when the cap will go up tremendously) that the 2012-2013 caps be “trended” to the 2014-2015 numbers and averaged out. This way, guys in the last 2-3 years of their careers get screwed just before the bigger paydays kick in.

    But if a team really wants to retain a player now, and they think he has at least three years left in him, they can use that new cap number (predictions are that revenue increases will be 60% and since the cap is tied to the revenue we could see a cap of around $190MM in 2015). The problem for players like Jacobs, Thomas, Hixon, Osi, etc. is that not that many will be viewed as sure bets to be productive for four more years. Their union let them down, and a good number will find that the pay-scale for them is not what they hoped.

    In regard to Jacobs, what Reese must do is make a credible offer, allow BJ a few weeks to explore the market, but make sure that the way things are left is that the Giants want him and would welcome him back and the offer is “just business”. The likely outcome would be BJ and his agent would find that he cannot get $3MM + anywhere (that’s probably what he’s looking for at this point) and will come back for one more go-round with Reese, knowing the Giants will pay about 80-90% of what he could get elsewhere and having to decide if that kind of a home team discount makes sense for him.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if JR is asking for Jacons to cut his salary below 2 Mil. On the open market he’s probably not worth that figure.

  6. Dave CoughlinFoxlin21 says:

    repost

    Samard -

    What about Kevin Koger around the 4-5th range. Seems like he has pretty good speed, can work the middle. Clearly he comes from RR’s spread offense which hurt his production and development but I like what I have seen from this kid.

    Also saw on a previous post you may have lost your job. Not sure what you are looking for, I’m no fat cat but would be happy to pass your resume along.

  7. Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

    I love Domenik Hixon, but as a receiver on his best day he wasn’t as good as Manningham on his worst. He would be a very pale substitute for Mario, although possibly a “competent” #3 receiver. I do not think Reese will give him much guaranteed money, and I’d be surprised if he made it higher than #5 on the depth chart at receiver. What I would hope is that he had regained that wonderful ability to sense a seam on returns and hit it hard and fast. He had the kind of anticipation that none of our alternatives to him have shown since Hixon stopped handling the return duties.

  8.  GOAT56 says:

    My educated guess is that this means Jacobs is released. I think JR has made a offer not to his liking and he’s not looking to take the pay cut that has been presented. We have seen JR doesn’t really negotiate, he just makes a “fair” offer. Jacobs seems to think the offer is too much of a pay cut. Therefore, it seems that Jacobs will be cut. It’s possible he still returns but I think Jacobs will be cut.

    • Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

      Have to be careful about how this goes. Jacobs is a very proud man. Whatever offer he got (and I suspect they were talking below $2MM) he wouldn’t have liked. But Reese needs to keep the door wide open and emphasize that the Giants really want BJ and hope he’ll come back after testing the market. Jacobs would play for less in New York, but he doesn’t want to be humiliated. His agent will find that he won’t get offered much more than $1.4-$1.6MM by other teams, and then Reese could have him for about $1.25-$1.5MM, which I think makes sense. But it won’t happen if BJ sees that as coming back hat-in-hand. He’ll sign elsewhere to retain his dignity. I suspect Reese knows this and will handle it just right. I hope so, because I want the big guy back.

      •  Krow says:

        This always happens with players on the downside of their careers. While not a feature back any longer he still has the ability to play a reserve role. Unfortunately he’s been paid as a feature back for the last 4 years. And it’s in his head that taking less is somehow demeaning or humiliating.

        You’re right … a 3 year deal in the $5-6,000,000 range is what he’s worth. But there’s a good chance his ego will cause him to reject reality … and end up out of football.

        •  GOAT56 says:

          I think Jacobs could be worth 1.7 – 2 Mil for 2012 but there’s no way he’s worth that contract. I think Jacobs has one maybe 2 more years playing at an effective level.

          I go back and forth with Jacobs returning. I see he’s still effective and is one of our leaders. However, I think a new energy at RB could be healthy. And RB is one of the few positions where a rookie can be just as effective or better than a vet right away.

          I think this is part of the reason for a “hardball” offer towards Jacobs. JR would prefer him back but wouldn’t lose sleep if he left either.

      •  HopLax08 says:

        Sadly, Krow and FF55 are right. BJ is a prideful man and he may not see reality quickly. Hopefully his agent doesn’t paint a “sky is the limit” picture for him, but rather gives him an objective honest assessment of his value and attractiveness to other teams.

        My fear for Jacobs is that by the time he realizes his true non-ego value the Giants will have already moved on to Plan B and he is out of the picture. That would be a lost opportunity for both him and the Giants.

  9.  Krow says:

    Dave Tollefson is in the same category as Rocky Bernard … solid, veteran depth … that is CHEAP.

    I love having both of them on the team. But if they think they’re getting much more than a modest contract then good luck. Watch the door. Turn in your parking pass.

    Both of them are feasting on the NYG philosophy that stocks talent knee-deep on the DL. For them the grass isn’t greener elsewhere. In fact I don’t think there’s any grass at all.

    • Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

      Not only are you probably correct, but there are guys waiting in the wings to replace each of them: Hendricks and Kennedy hoping Rocky’s gone; and Trattou and Marshall probably expecting to displace Tollefson. Every one of them is the kind of “plug-in” that the Giants always use at the bottom of their depth charts but among them they may have the potential to upgrade BOTH #4 spots on the depth charts at DT and DE. My guess is Bernard retires after having given them more than most here realize, and that Tollefson moves on to some team where he might be their #3 guy so they’ll pay him more than we would.

      •  giantsfan says:

        I read that Rocky wants to play and wants to remain a Giant. So he’ll probably be cheap. He’s been rejuvenated in the past couple of seasons. Lost a lot of weight too. He’s looking like a solid solid veteran.

        • Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

          I hope so. I have been a big advocate of his. But at some number he may decide that the beating isn’t worth it any longer. I’d love him back for one more year but am not counting on it.

  10. Abbott Stillmanfanfor55years says:

    What is really remarkable about the Giants going forward is that they have very few JAGs on the team. I look at their roster and suspect they have more depth than just about anyone in the league.

    On defense the starting front line is all top players, and it’s entirely possible that both Austin and Trattou could be significantly more than JAGs too. At linebacker the only possible JAGs are Blackburn, Goff, Herzlich, Jones and Paysinger, but I think you have to factor in that the first two are brilliant at running the defense and therefore have extra value, and that the other three have been terrific on special teams. In the defensive backfield I think their only possible JAGs might turn out to be Terrell Thomas (or Ross, whomever returns) and the guys deep on the depth chart.

    On offense you could argue that all of the running backs are JAGs, as are the receivers behind Nicks and Cruz (and Manningham if he returns) with jernigan expected to leap out of that category in 2012 and it entirely possible that Thomas will too. On the O-line you’ve got Diehl, McKenzie if he’s back, and possibly Bass (although I think he will prove to be far from that this season).

    That really isn’t many of those JAGs for a salary-constrained team. All of our division rivals have many more. And if Reese/Ross have a great draft we may see a number of these JAGs disappear as quickly as next August. I think the combination of Eli Manning in his prime, a pretty solid roster with not many JAGs, and a good number of “impact” players on the team, along with a solid coaching staff that really now “knows” the players and a front office that keeps feeding the team good ones, is primed to compete hard, barring injury, for the next 3-4 Lombardi Trophies. It takes plenty of luck to get one, but the Giants should be in the running and the odds of getting another pretty decent.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      +1

      I would add Sash on defense. But your point is correct. This is the exact problem the Eagles faced last year. While the had a lot of star players, they were relying on way too many JAGs to fill out their roster and in some starting positions. We are like a 12 man deep basketball team, in basketball that doesn’t really work but due to the injury factor that’s exactly what you need in today’s nfl.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: