Getting Personal: Corey Williams & Brandon Jacobs
During the week, Cleveland Browns defensive end Corey Williams stated that New York Giants running back Brandon Jacobs can indeed be stopped, providing a little bit of bulletin board material as Jacobs responded.
I asked John Woods of the New York Times' Fifth Down Blog what his take was on this matter:
Question: "Corey Williams was on the Green Bay Packers team that held Brandon Jacobs to 67 yards in the postseason last year. Williams was quoted this week as saying, "You have to come out and hit him [Jacobs] in the mouth early. That way he gets tentative later on. We need to do that Monday night." Jacobs then responded with non-direct, yet direct jabs back at Williams.
How do you expect the physical Jacobs to fare against a massive front including Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams? Which team, if any, will the "bulletin-board material" benefit more, considering the Browns need to do something to get the ball rolling, but the Giants are used to this sort of thing?"
Woods: "The thing is, the Giants seem to be on a roll, and not just on the field: I think their morale must be at a record high. The Plaxico Burress story (where the team suspended him for missing a Monday workout) seemed to have no effect in the locker room, and that's in New York where the media is thirsty for player-on-player crime. So when the Browns' Corey Williams says something like Brandon Jacobs is going to be tentative when confronted by a physical front four on defense, I think it's poor strategy on his part.
For one thing, Jacobs is a physical runner. For better or for worse, that's his game. What Williams said is probably the kind of pregame talk Jacobs, and his offensive line, wants to hear.
For another thing, the Giants' rushing game seems fairly solid. Last week, it went up against a Seahawks' defense that had held Marshawn Lynch, Frank Gore and Steven Jackson all well under 100 yards apiece. Jacobs rushed for 136, with two scores. All three of the Giants tailbacks who played in that game averaged better than 5 yards a carry and had at least one gain of 20 yards or more. Now, I am not saying the Giants are unstoppable, but their success on the ground so far is probably not a fluke.
Finally, even if Williams is right, and Jacobs is a panty-waisted Nancy Boy who is going to be cowed by some solid knocks to the head, the Giants have like-minded runners to replace him, including Ahmad Bradshaw, who led the Giants in rushing in the playoffs last seson.
So, I think Williams's comments probably play into the Giants' hands a little, though sometimes I think pro athletes are so removed from real life that bulletin-board stuff just doesn't matter to them. No matter what happens, Jacobs will still drive home in his giant S.U.V. Anyway, it's probably more important, I think, for the Browns to score a few points than to get into Jacobs's head."
I'd like to thank John for taking the time to answer my question. Tomorrow morning, I will have a prediction blurb of this week's game on the Times' Fifth-Down Blog, so stay tuned for that.
Comments
While I agree that Williams should have kept his mouth shut (he’s been mediocre this year), I think the illustration of Jacobs’ success vs. Seattle was a little out of context. I mean, you don’t run for 9 ypc and 2 touchdowns unless there is a problem on the defensive side of the ball.
I expect the Giants to have 100+ yards rushing on us.
by Estonianzulu on
Oct 10, 2008 2:02 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I think the G-men will light us up for at least 200-225 yards and 3 rushing TDs. Manning and company will be looking to pad their stats and I don’t think we’ll be able to do anything about it. Williams should let his play do his talking…so far that means he should’nt say anything at all!
Oh The People You Meet When Your Out of Ammo.........
by Juannieboy on
Oct 10, 2008 2:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Usually but, I got a bad feeling about this one. Jacobs and Bradshaw looked like a two headed monster. I hope I am wrong.
Oh The People You Meet When Your Out of Ammo.........
by Juannieboy on
Oct 10, 2008 9:43 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sticks and stones….. dude
Oh The People You Meet When Your Out of Ammo.........
by Juannieboy on
Oct 10, 2008 9:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I actually didn’t mean to post that. I was thinking it and I did type it, so it is my fault, but I didn’t mean to post that (probably doesn’t make it any better).
It was the incorrect choice between your/you’re in your tag that put me over the top.
by rufio on
Oct 10, 2008 10:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We haven’t let up 200 yards all season.
by Estonianzulu on
Oct 10, 2008 3:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
True. But I see alot of 3 and outs for our offense because, I think you will agree, they suck. If so, I see the defense wearing down quickly. NYG will run when they have the ball. As a team that knows how to put another team away, they will put up a ton of yards.
Again, thats the way I see it and I will happily eat crow if proved wrong.
Oh The People You Meet When Your Out of Ammo.........
by Juannieboy on
Oct 10, 2008 9:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As a past owner of the Seattle Seahawks’ D….they are not good at all. These stats look nice, but don’t mean a damn thing.
What would your gameplan be against the 49ers? The Rams? The Bills?
Well, with the Rams, that’s a little of a trick question because you don’t need a gameplan to beat the Rams. Regardless, I would look to stop the run against any one of those teams. Seattle played Buffalo in week 1, meaning that Trent Edwards had not done much to justify his status as a starting NFL QB. I would have looked to make him pass to his 1 legitimate WR against my pro-bowl-caliber CB and my pass rush (which is probably the strength of my defense). I didn’t believe JT O’Sullivan was an NFL caliber QB in week 2, and would have made him pass against me. Frank Gore and Marshawn Lynch have proven they can be pro bowl RBs, why not look to stop the run? As an NFL defense, you should be able to limit the offense’s best player or either the run or the pass game. If you are giving up 321 in the air (with zero interceptions) to J.T. O’Sullivan and 33 points, it won’t matter how well you did against the run.
Also, the jobs they did against those three RBs don’t look as good when you factor in receiving yards or even fantasy points (I would argue a decent measure of the success of a RB).
Not saying we hold Jacobs to less than 100, but it’s not like the Seahawks are sporting the best run D in the NFL.
by rufio on
Oct 10, 2008 10:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
But it is sweet that a NY Times guy is corresponding with Chris. This particular NY Times guy happens to just be incorrect in his assessment of the Seahawks’ D.
by rufio on
Oct 10, 2008 10:05 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The benefits of playing a New York football team :) Mass media galore…
Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.
by ChrisPokorny on
Oct 10, 2008 10:15 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Owner in a fantasy league?
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on
Oct 10, 2008 10:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes, fantasy. I am no where close to wealthy enough to own any sort of sports franchise.
by rufio on
Oct 11, 2008 2:08 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Just tremendous. Williams by most accounts is having an average to below average year, on a 1-3 team, the one win against the Bengals without there starting QB, wants to run his mouth against a RB on a team that is 4-0 coming a Super Bowl year.
Typical Browns, I just don’t get this. Coming off a bye, the team, and himself have played poorly, you got a beast of a schedule ahead of you, and you have to say this.
Keep it shut and win a meaningful game for a change.
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on
Oct 10, 2008 10:23 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Need Some Offense
I don’ t think the defense is playing especially poorly. It’s just that once again we have an offense that only lets the D rest for four snaps before they have to take the field again.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying they are a top-notch defense, but I think if they were paired up with even a mediocre offense they would look a lot better that the numbers are showing right now.
On a related note, I’ve tried to stay objective regarding the QB situation, but at this point the only reason I can see for starting Anderson this week is to reduce the risk of an injury to Quinn before week seven. I just wish we could get a QB who was good enough to keep around for more than one season.
by JustBob on
Oct 10, 2008 10:53 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
What you need is a miracle
Brandon Jacobs will SMASH on williams and the rest of the poo poo brown D. They will go after him in the first few plays of the game, then realize that they are just getting beat up and as the game wears on, running becomes easier and easier for the big man and your D will become more and more tenative
by EliTheChosen1 on
Oct 11, 2008 5:22 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Was Eli the chosen one before or after the Super Bowl?
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on
Oct 11, 2008 6:34 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I rate Eli as average for a pro qb (which is pretty good), but that doesn’t make NY an elite team. In fact, the entire offense is average. The NY defense is the crusher.
by elsandito on
Oct 12, 2008 11:49 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What happens when a D becomes tenative?
by Roger Dorn on
Oct 12, 2008 9:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
before the super bowl. don’t be upset cuz that flash in the pan anderson burned out
by EliTheChosen1 on
Oct 11, 2008 8:36 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I always get a kick out of people who talk football like this. The second the Giants lose a game, it’ll be “f’in Eli can’t handle the pressure!” all over again for this guy.
Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.
by ChrisPokorny on
Oct 11, 2008 8:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
New York fans are notoriously fickle. Having lived in NYC for a few years now, I can attest to it
by Roger Dorn on
Oct 12, 2008 9:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs














