News Archives

Former New York Giants Guard Bill Albright Dies at Age 83

January 21st, 2013 at 9:35 AM
By Dan Benton

The New York Giants never forget a member of their own, and last week, another one was lost as former guard, Bill Albright, passed away at the age of 83.

Albright, who was drafted in the 20th round of the 1951 NFL Draft, played all four years of his NFL career with the Giants. He played the position of guard on both offense and defense, recovering eight fumbles -one of which was returned for a touchdown- in his 47 career games.

In 1955, Albright would be lured away from Steve Owen and the Giants by the Canadian Football League (joining the Toronto Argonauts and later the Montreal Alouettes), who offered him a substantial raise. He would go on to play in Canada for an additional four years before being forced to retire due to injury.

Albright is survived by his wife, Eleanor, his four children, William, Jon, Kristine and Patricia, his five grandchildren and one great-grandson.

Thoughts and prayers go out to the Albright family. Once a Giant, always a Giant.

Also…

Tags: Bill Albright, Football, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

32 Responses to “Former New York Giants Guard Bill Albright Dies at Age 83”

  1.  Krow says:

    He played at 6’1″ … 233 lbs.

    •  demo3356 says:

      Wow that is a small full back now..

    •  fanfor55years says:

      Those were the days when relatively normal-sized American men were 2-3″ shorter than now and 20-30 pounds lighter, so the NFL players were still, relatively speaking, “big”, but there was not nearly as wide a gulf between those players and the population as is the case now.

      The players were also lily-white. Very different game, very different time.

      •  demo3356 says:

        agreed.. what blows me awaw more so than the size of the current NFL Player is the speed of these monsters.. I’m fortunate enough with my job to spend time on UCF’s sidelines for many of their practices and at 6’4 320 I feel like a fat little kid standing amongst their Lineman. Those guys were all built like Oak Tress and could flat out run. Keep in mind I’m talking UCF, not an SEC school like bama or Georgia but a Conf USA team. It is mind boggling how big strong and fast these athletes are

  2.  demo3356 says:

    Yeah no chance Baas gets cut.. I’ve seen some of the arm chair GM’s mention it but nt anyone with a clue. Guy is a very good player who has struggled to stay healthy here. He would be way to expensive to cut and is still young. No chance he goes anywhere
    It is much harder to cut guys with multiple years left on their deals then it is to cut guys going into their final year. All remaining bonus money immediately goes against the cap as dead money. This is why I pointed out guys like Webster, Boley, Deihl or even Tuck as more likely to get the ax.. The more I think about it though the more I think Tuck stays and finishes out his contract before he is sent packing like Osi this year.
    Bradshaw is a little bit different of a scenario though because RB is both the easiest and cheapest position to replace through the draft. A 5th or 6th rd pick making 400K can be an impact player almost immediatly, something you dont see at DL, OL, WR LB etc..

    •  wlubake says:

      With Bradshaw, his contract isn’t overly onerous. He could be retained or possibly traded. If I’m Green Bay, I have to listen. Bradshaw for a 3 or 4 would make some sense. Arizona should be looking too. There isn’t much on the FA market at RB (Mendenhall, Reggie Bush and Shonn Greene are the most appealing). Bradshaw is a much better balanced back than any of those.

      •  demo3356 says:

        bro, NO WAY any team gives up a 3 or a 4 for a high priced injury prone RB when they draft one that is 6-7 years younger, cheaper and healthier in later rounds.. IF the Giants were somehow lucky enough to find a trade partner for Bradshaw it would be for a 7th rd pick at best

        •  wlubake says:

          You might be right. However, for every good pick up from round 3 on, there are a handful of misses.

          Here’s a look from 2012 back to 2009.

          In 2009, there were 17 RBs taken after the first 2 rounds. Of that group, only Rashad Jennings (7), LaRod Stephens-Howling (7) Andre Brown (4) and Shonn Greene (3) have seen significant time. None would be more desirable options than Bradshaw, or even very comparable.

          In 2010, there were 10 RBs taken after the first 2 rounds. Of that group, only Jonathan Dwyer (6) and James Starks (6) have seen significant time. Bradshaw beats both again, though Dwyer has had moments.

          In 2011, 26 RBs were taken after the first 2 rounds. This was the best class, as DeMarco Murray (3) and Steven Ridley (3) come from this class. No others, except maybe Jacquizz Rodgers (5) could be compared to Bradshaw.

          Finally, 2012. 16 RBs were taken. Thos that saw time were Ronnie Hillman (3), Bernard Pierce (3), Lamar Miller (4), Vick Ballard (5), Alfred Morris (6) and Bryce Brown (7). Only Morris is a more favorable option.

          So if I’m Green Bay, and I’ve drafted the likes of Starks and Alex Green in the past, with minimal success, AND I’m a Super Bowl contender, I have to consider what would have the best chance of upgrading my rushing attack this year.

          You are right, that a 3 is probably too rich. But since 2009, 3 players (out of 69!) have been drafted after the 2nd round which could be considered to be a better RB option than Bradshaw. Why gamble on finding that 4% yield when you can give up a pick to get a proven RB who, despite having some injury history, has never been a bell cow carry-wise? Maybe a 5 or below is better consideration, but it is a much better option for the Giants, regardless, than cutting him.

          My point is more that he has value. Cutting and keeping are likely not the only options.

  3.  demo3356 says:

    Guys like Baas, Snee, Canty, Rolle and Manning are prime candidates for Restructures.

  4.  demo3356 says:

    Thomas’s contract was set up as one year deal that could be undone this off season with no cap penalty.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      Yeah, I think many don’t realize that. Only way TT comes back is on another “prove it” deal at just about veteran minimum. Reese is no sentimentalist.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        He could sign a similar lower deal as the one he signed last year. So insuring we have him in case TT becomes close to the player he was. But regardless in 2013 he will be lucky to make 2 mil like he did last year.

  5.  fanfor55years says:

    So I guess the nonsense about cutting Baas (although I have to admit I hadn’t seen much of that here) and Bradshaw (I still think they should ask him to restructure but there’s no way they SHOULD cut him regardless of the cap situation when they still need a three-man RB depth chart and the “cost” is only $2.75MM to retain him) will now end.

    Hopefully the noise about Tuck will also end soon. He won’t even be asked to give back anything unless Reese is convinced he has 3-4 more good years in him, in which case he may be a candidate for an extension that stretches out his 2013 salary for cap purposes. I don’t see this happening but you never know.

    Canty, Phillips, Webster, Boothe and Boley are the really tough decisions given that every one of them may have some good years left but will take up huge amounts of cap space (except, presumably, in Boothe’s case). Beatty is easy. They MUST keep him, and get it done fast. I think Bennett should be easy but it will depend upon the cost versus what’s left under the cap. Signing him, though, probably takes tight end off the table as a need for at least 5-6 years if Robinson is what the scouts thought he was.

    It would be nice to know what the capology is in regard to Canty, Webster and Boley. If the pain isn’t too great and the dollars are needed I would: restructure Canty; sign Phillips; sign Boothe; draft a cornerback with my first or second pick and dump Webster unless he would add a year or two to his contract and restructure to severely reduce the cap hit when he was released and while he’s playing the backup outside corner position on the depth chart; and reluctantly release Boley (because we have enough depth there assuming we can get Rivers on the cheap) even though I believe he is still our best linebacker. But I’ll trust Reese to make the right decisions. he knows more about the cap situation, his plans, and the remaining value of these players than all of us combined.

  6.  wlubake says:

    PSA – the G101 Marty B story got picked up in PFT’s daily one-liners. May want to go pepper that page with some comments to help G101 out. Right now, it’s only got 3 comments. Show stoppers-by that this is the prime NYG fan destination.

  7.  GOAT56 says:

    Sorry wrong way to look at Bradshaw in the last piece. Basically, 2.5 mil is a sunk cost for Bradshaw regardless of whether he is on the team. So that shouldn’t factor in how you view him regardless what you want to do with Bradshaw. We still save 2.75 mil by cutting him. If we re-structure Bradshaw how can we change the 2.5 we are paying for him without extending his current contract? It seems that money that is guaranteed is to hit the cap is tied into Bradshaw’s bonus he was already paid. Therefore getting his cap number lower than 2.5 doesn’t seem possible without an extension.

    •  demo3356 says:

      agreed.. They can cut him, draft another back in the mid to late rds and save over 2 mil… This will also force the coaching staff into making Wilson the feature back

      •  GOAT56 says:

        Good point. I think that’s also a factor with players like Blackburn and Diehl. Them being back as only backups is not as straight forward as some seem to think. If these players return there is a pretty good chance they start.

      •  wlubake says:

        1,000 yard rushers that run as hard as Bradshaw can’t be found just by looking. I trust our scouting department too, but we can’t just suppose that he can be easily replaced through the draft. Other teams have tried and failed, as I outline above.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      The possibilty is a one-year extension, spreading the $2.5MM out so it’s $1.25MM next year along with a maybe $2.5MM salary, of which $1.0MM is “availability-based” with a $2.0 MM mutual buy-out clause so Bradshaw can shop himself and, if he gets a better offer, it costs us very little to see him on his way (at most $3.75MM, I think, and possibly nothing, depending upon the rules) while we get a pretty darned good part of our three-way back depth chart this season for $2.75MM, which is a bit high but not very far beyond what his current value remains.

      I’m not saying they should do this, but it’s an option that would not kill us and would give us three good running backs.

      In any case, Wilson HAS to be the #1 guy on the depth chart. But having Bradshaw available in case of injury and having him fresh because he’s never getting more than 6-10 carries per game would not be a bad thing for 2013.

  8.  Kevros says:

    The new CBA:

    https://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/PDFs/General/2011_Final_CBA.pdf

    Starting on page 92 Valuation of Player Contracts, it talks about what pieces count against the cap and when. It’s pretty confounded legal talk, but it seems pretty similar to the old CBA when it comes to calculating cap hits…

  9.  Kevros says:

    I calculated a rough estimate of what the team would save by cutting the three players FF55 mentioned above. The numbers are based on Rotoworld’s contract details which are a simplified since nobody (outside of the Giants organization) really knows all of the working parts of a player’s contract.

    Cutting Canty would save $920k.
    Cutting Webster would save $3.67m.
    Cutting Boley would save $2.05m.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: