News Archives

New York Giants’ Justin Tuck, Chris Snee Happy to Have Cullen Jenkins on Their Side

March 12th, 2013 at 10:00 AM
By Dan Benton

On Monday, the New York Giants officially signed defensive tackle Cullen Jenkins. It was the first of what are sure to be several moves needed to help solidify a defensive line that struggled with injury and inconsistency in 2012. It was also a move that added much needed versatility to the interior of that line – something defensive captain Justin Tuck welcomes with open arms.

"You’re talking about a guy who brings a lot of diversity to the D-line, because he can play pretty much anywhere along the line,” said defensive end Justin Tuck, “It gives us the opportunity to continue to give teams different looks. He’s a big, strong, athletic guy who knows the ropes and knows what it takes to be successful in this league."

But Tuck isn't the only one happy to see Jenkins in blue. Giants co-owner John Mara said the signing also received a stamp of approval from three-time All-Pro guard Chris Snee, who is admittedly thrilled he won't have to deal with defending Jenkins this coming season.

"He was one of the highest players we had rated. From our pro personnel people to our coaches, and as I understand it, even Chris Snee was very much in favor of the signing because he's been a tough opponent over the years," co-owner John Mara said on Monday. "He'll give us a certain toughness on the defensive line. He's been a very productive player for years now, and I think he'll add a lot to us."

In his four NFC East battles with the Giants over the last two years, Jenkins has made 12 tackles and recorded 1.5 sacks, one stuff and batted down a pass. Prior to joining the Philadelphia Eagles, he played in an additional three games (including the 2007 NFC Championship game) against the Giants, collecting nine tackles and batting down two passes.

Also…

Tags: Chris Snee, Cullen Jenkins, Football, John Mara, Justin Tuck, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

28 Responses to “New York Giants’ Justin Tuck, Chris Snee Happy to Have Cullen Jenkins on Their Side”

  1.  The Original G Man says:

    Jason LaCanfora says TB is going to push hard for Cliff Avril. Could have an impact on where Michael and, by extension, Martellus Bennett, end up

  2.  Nosh.0 says:

    Dan-
    The way you feel about Mannignham is the same way I feel about Marty B. I think the dude is a clown. Not only that but I don’t trust him in a big spot and was annoyed to no end to find out late in the year he was still missing assignments and running the wrong routes.

    I know everyone likes to use Nicks absence and Cruz’s lack of “eliteness” as reasons why our offense was so bad in the 2nd half, but part of that was the fact that Marty B isn’t really a difference maker at TE. Which is why I don’t see us paying him, because the man is replaceable. Even if he is the second coming of Larry Allen and Richard Pryor.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      I come very close to agreeing with you on this. I love Marty B. and the Black Unicorn. But Martellus Bennett the football player? Good player, with upside potential, excellent blocker and good-not-great receiver. A little unreliable and not necessarily the guy you’d want targeted on 4th-and-goal with the season on the line (and by the way, I was always fine with Kevin Boss being that target, and even with Jake Ballard).

      I’d like him back, but strictly on the Giants’ terms. I’ll say right now that Zach Erst will be a better tight end in the NFL than Marty B. will be. The same probably goes for the kid from Notre Dame.

      Bennett is overrated among Giants fans. I love the guy. Hope he stays. Would hate it if he’s overpaid because he is a solid B as a tight end right now who MIGHT become an A-quality player but just as likely won’t.

      •  Nosh.0 says:

        I think thats my biggest thing. Season on the line I would have had no problem going to Ballard or Boss. Bennet on the other hand I would.

        But we agree. Great upside and potential, but I can’t break the bank for him.

        •  jfunk says:

          I’ll agree with this. I’m probably his biggest fan on here, but yeah I’d certainly want to look for a different number on 4th & goal.

          I do think that he COULD get there though. He made some really athletic plays that Boss & Ballard never could have in his one year here. Eli certainly wasn’t afraid to go to him, he did have 90 targets.

          I’ll be sad to see him go, and I think having finally been unshackled his best years are ahead of him. Unfortunately, “paying” a TE just isn’t in the cards, we’ve got bigger fish to fry.

          Let the Robinson era begin.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I agree that Bennett wasn’t the player he should have been in the 2nd half. Some of that was injury but the fact is he wasn’t what we needed. However, it was his first year in this system and as a first year player he was as good as any target I can remember in recent years. Bennett can get better in this system in coming years. But he is just a good part in the cog just like Cruz, although Cruz is a better player. Both can be replaced but we are better with both players. My issue with keeping Cruz is the assumed price tag, not that he can’t play at a high level. There’s a similar concern with Bennett.

      But if we are going to lose Cruz this year or next year one of the ways I think we make up for his absence is more 2 TEs sets. Having a Bennett and Robinson as 2 TEs that can block, catch and athletic enough to really threaten the defense helps.

  3.  Levito says:

    James Stoll says:
    March 12, 2013 at 10:01 AM
    If Cruz makes the Madden cover, trade him

    —–

    Calvin Johnson seemed to fare pretty well after making the Madden cover.

  4.  GOAT56 says:

    Repost:

    GOAT56 says:
    March 12, 2013 at 10:06 AM
    I doubt Cruz signs right away. Cruz needs the top UFA free agent WRs off the market to then see what his value will be to a team still in need of a WR. If a team is going to make him an offer when they have less options that opens up the need bargaining position for Cruz.

    Bennett will be interesting. If his brother signs elsewhere, there’s at least a 50-50 chance he returns.

    If we re-sign Cruz and/or extend Nicks that doesn’t require much additional cap space id any at all. Nicks’ 2013 cap hit is 3.7 mil and Cruz’s with the tender is now 2.9 mil. Beatty after re-signing his huge deal only has a 3.5 mil cap hit. Since most of these types of contracts provide a lot of upfront money in bonuses that bonus cap hit is spread out over the length of the contract. Simply put Nicks and/or Cruz could get big money with a cap hit already in the range of the cap number each already has. Eli extending would be more about freeing up money for free agents like Bennett, Boothe and/or an outside player.

    Reply
    fanfor55years says:
    March 12, 2013 at 10:16 AM
    The Nicks extension definitely wouldn’t hurt cap-wise very much. It will be all about guaranteed money and signing bonus.

    I’m not even sure they’d have to give a big bonus to Cruz as long as the contract was a good one and had plenty of guarantees. He could play for the tender offer in 2013 (after all, that’s still a huge raise for him), get a big increase in 2014 and then start to max out in 2015 when the cap rises while knowing that he was guaranteed a boatload of money.

    The Giants can make this work, but only if they have reasonable negotiating partners. It’s up to the players because the team is not going to overpay for Cruz and will only slightly overpay for Nicks.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I think one of the ways that Nicks and/or Cruz accept a lower contract is more money upfront and more guarantees. Like Maybe Cruz accepts a 5 year 30 mil contract if 20 mil is guaranteed and 20 mil is upfront. That’s a random example but I think that’s the only way we could keep Cruz within our wanted aggregate contract totals.

  5.  jfunk says:

    Somebody mentioned to me a few threads ago that you can’t front load salary on contracts to take the cap hit early. Now, my theory for how to do it (huge 1st year salary instead of a signing bonus) may be inaccurate, but apparently the 49ers have been somehow accomplishing the same thing in principal for years:

    ————————————
    Cap Status: The 49ers have been tight against the cap recently, but they’ll gain breathing room when the Alex Smith trade becomes official. Smith had been scheduled to earn a $1 million bonus and $7.5 million in salary. The team has found creative ways to comply with the cap, including when it packed into its 2013 budget more than $17 million in charges for Patrick Willis, lessening the hits in other years. Willis’ contract is scheduled to count only slightly more than that $17.7 million over the next three seasons combined. The 49ers took a similar tack in 2009, when contracts for Justin Smith and Joe Staley combined to use more than $30 million in cap space.
    ————————————-

    So, anybody care to dig and find those contract details to see how the 49ers chose years during which to absorb large cap hits that allowed for small cap hits in future years? If I were a team rebuilding and flush with cap space (like the Colts I suggested as a potential Cruz suitor) this is exactly how I would try to use my cap space. Lock up a few stars and pay off the majority of their cap hits early, that way you still have lots of space to maneuver in the future while still having those stars under contract.

    Seems like a smarter way to build than the constant “push it to next year’s cap” method. Of course your team has to be a dumpster fire to start.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      The 49ers used the years when they weren’t good wisely. Rememebr they sucked before the past 2 years so they were investing heavily in the draft and the dfew player they gave big money to they could afford to front load those contracts. That was smart but doesn’t apply to our situation because we are not rebuilding.

      •  jfunk says:

        The question is HOW did they front load those contracts? I was told there was some kind of “escalating salary” rule that prevented you from giving a guy a huge 1st year salary then cutting it way back in future years when I suggested using this strategy as a “poison pill” to get Cruz away from the Giants without them being able to match the offer.

        If a player’s salary can’t be scheduled to go down during his contract years, and signing bonuses are pro-rated, how exactly did the 49ers manage to take the big cap hit on these salaries early?

        With the new minimum spend rule, this is a REALLY wise way for teams to spend some cash without having to just throw it at guys they don’t really need. Just “pre-pay” your cap hit on some of your stars instead so you have that space to sign more big players in future years.

        •  GOAT56 says:

          I don’t know for sure but if there is a rule I bet it’s to guard against very specific type of contracts. Wasn’t the contract Osi had similar in some ways to these SF player contracts?

  6.  fanfor55years says:

    Umm, this Cullen Jenkins love is getting a bit much. Guy is definitely on the downside of his career. He was a force in Green Bay, but that’s the past. I definitely like the signing because it gives us a guy who can shore up the rotation (and probably start next to Joseph) while allowing Kuhn time to recover, Austin time to find his game, and Rogers time to rest, but let’s not pretend we got what we were getting when Chris Canty was signed. Injuries sapped the value out of the Canty signing but he was a stud who was still near the top of his game when we grabbed him (and the cost indicated that). Jenkins will be a contributor but IMO we definitely need to draft the guy we expect to become the anchor of the defensive line on the inside. I hope we do that next month.

    •  jfunk says:

      Agreed. This is a 1-2 year stopgap. That being said, I think he’s a great 1-2 year stopgap and came at a great price. Thrilled with the signing, but I don’t think he’ll be going to any pro-bowls in Blue.

      •  The Original G Man says:

        I agree. Like with Shawn Rogers, he’s meant to buy us some time until some of the young guys (Kuhn, Austin, draft pick) are able to take over.

      •  Nosh.0 says:

        Yeah I think it’s a nice depth signing. At the very least he should be very useful on 3rd downs. And I also think the Giants front office wanted to throw a bone to Norm. He’s been asking for a pass rushing DT for a while now.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I said I was luke warm about the signing because he doesn’t improve our run defense. I think we needed more of a younger Rodgers type that can play significant snaps. But maybe it’s more important to help the interior pass rush. So while we got a good deal on him as a player and he can take a starters share of snaps which we need, I’m not as positive about the signing as some.

      •  jfunk says:

        I see what you’re saying, but EVERYBODY wants a “young Rogers type”. Those guys get paid, which the Giants aren’t in position to do.

        •  GOAT56 says:

          When I say young I mean young enough to pay meaningful snaps. So that player could be 30-32. The problem with Rodgers right now is that he’s limited snap wise in what he can give us. I would take the level he can play at now for starter level snaps in theory as my DT signing instead of Jenkins.

  7. Anthony Raiaaxr29 says:

    Rumors swirling of Ed Reed to the 49ers per PFT

    •  jfunk says:

      The Giants knocked the 49ers out in the 2011 NFC Championship. They signed every Giant they could and improved one win to reach the 2012 Superbowl, where they were knocked out by the Ravens.

      Logically, if they now sign every Raven they can, they’ll improve one more win…

  8.  Chad Eldred says:

    -The 49′ers seem to be linked to just about everyone.

    -I know that a lot of people will be disappointed, but I really don’t think the Black Unicorn will be back. That doesn’t have as much to do with Reese not liking him as much as it has to do with how much Reese believes in Robinson. I think Reese has concluded the only way to get these guys on the field is to take away Coughlin’s other options. That’s the same reason I ruled out a Bradshaw return, even if he offered to play for free.

    -I’m starting to wish the Cruz thing would just get resolved in some way. The intense speculation and dramatic fan mood swings with every scrap of a rumor is getting a bit tiresome.

  9.  GOAT56 says:

    Quick run at Cruz isn’t likely

    At 4:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Giants receiver Victor Cruz secures the ability to negotiate with any other team in the league.

    But since he’s a restricted free agent, subject to the machinations of a seven-day period for matching any offers received, it’s not likely that anyone will make an early run at Cruz.

    The teams with cap money to spend will be trying to spend it on unrestricted free agents, for now. Typically, the RFA market begins to heat up only after the UFA carousel has begun to slow down.

    In recent years, the RFA market has been dormant, with teams neither willing to negotiate a deal that would be matched by the player’s current team nor anxious to surrender compensation. Or, possibly, there’s collusion when it comes to players with three years of experience and no contract for year four.

    That could change with Cruz. A team in the bottom portion of round one could be willing to swap its pick for one of the best young receivers in the game — especially if that team has the cap space to craft a front loaded offer the Giants can’t or won’t match.

    Some of you have suggested that a team with a higher pick in round one could trade down and then use the lower pick for a crack at Cruz. It’s a good idea, but the rules prevent it. The pick that becomes compensation for a restricted free agent or a franchise player is the pick originally held by the team making the offer. If the team doesn’t have its original pick, an offer sheet can’t be signed.

    Either way, it’s highly unlikely that anyone will make a run at Cruz soon. In a week or two, however, things could get interesting.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/12/quick-run-at-cruz-isnt-likely/

  10.  The Original G Man says:

    @MikeGarafolo
    No, this was lost in translation. Cruz has to wait 5 days to hire new agent. RT @KrakenGreyjoy: Players w/new agent can’t sign for 72 hours?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: