Video Scouting: Brandon Jacobs
I pieced together this short video from available highlights. NFL.com isn't real keen on run defense, so it's shy on anything but Giants backs kicking ass. Nevertheless, though limited in scope, I think it offers a good look at the strengths and limitations of Brandon Jacobs. I included clips of Ahmad Bradshaw for comparison and to control for offensive line and play calling. You'll notice the first clip is Bradshaw.
Clip 1
Ahmad Bradshaw's Loose Upfield Cut
Toss play left. Bradshaw moves outside, plants and runs a looping cut up field. Bradshaw is more agile than Jacobs and sometimes it's to his detriment. Bradshaw runs for a good gain, but is slow into the second level.
Clips 2 & 3
Brandon Jacobs' Driving Upfield Cut
In the next two clips, you can see Jacobs driving into the second level with an efficient, powerful cut up field. Jacobs is fastest and strongest when his shoulders are parallel to the goal line. Jacobs has excellent feet and can cut well, but when in motion, his cut range becomes much more narrow.
Clips 4 & 5
Bradshaw's Quick Lateral Cut
Two perspectives on the same run. Here's where Bradshaw has it all over Jacobs: a high speed, lateral cut. Bradshaw is above average cutting "against the grain" on the move, and that cut, coupled with his balance helps him break a long run in the open field.
Clip 6
Jacobs' Narrow Cuts on the Run
This run examples an ideal Jacobs' rush: north to south. A few things are evident. First, his strong second gear, but also the negligible difference between his second and third gear. Jacobs has great burst on the second level, but he won't outrun a DB. More importantly, notice Jacobs' limited cutting range on the move. Some of this is simple momentum, 260 pounds is hard to stop -- even for Jacobs. Jacobs ran a 4.56/40, but a 7.53 three cone drill. The latter is linemen country. Offensive. Jacobs has excellent feet and is no doubt more agile than a linemen, but has limited cutting ability when running downhill. His cuts, sharp and assertive approaching the pile, become restricted and narrow when he's running hard.
Jacobs is a powerful, quick downhill rusher with incredible feet for his size, but his cuts become narrow and deliberate on the run. That's where I think Seattle's gang tackling, penetrative defense will shine. Jacobs is not strong at cutting laterally. His best cuts are up field. If Seattle should get early penetration, Jacobs is poorly fit to cut back away from defenders or scramble for daylight. Jacobs lack of elusiveness should allow Seattle to get bodies on him, and that should negate his power. I have all the respect in the world for Jacobs and think he's a top flight running back, but I see this matchup in Seattle's favor. Their run defense, already dominant, should turn Jacobs into a non-factor.
0 recs |
70
comments
Read Related
Comments
the question is....
….WILL we get penetration? The Giants’ offensive line is apparently pretty good.
by djafrot on Sep 29, 2008 3:40 PM PDT 0 recs
Here's an article about the Giants line
its by KC Joyner, this comes courtesy of a Giants blog. It’s interesting, although he doesn’t go much of anywhere with his arguments/point of emphasis.
by Badical Turbo Radness on
Sep 30, 2008 1:41 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I commend Joyner for the depth of information there, but the first thing that jumped out to me was...
this:
It isn’t just the high level of run type diversity that amazes me. The Giants are also exceptionally adept at running plays to either side. For example, 10 of New York’s counter plays have been run to the right side while nine have been run to the left. The Giants gained 54 yards on the right-side counter plays (5.4 YPA) and 71 yards on the left-side counters (7.9 YPA). That means a defense cannot overload to one side to stop this play because New York will simply turn around and run the play to the other side.
Yards per attempt is the absolute wrong metric to use on samples of nine or ten. A single long run would completely disrupt the average. Let’s say on the nine runs to the left, the results were 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 and 71. (AKA, the Deshaun Foster special) Would we say that’s a successful play call? Of course not, because one successful play, perhaps created by all sorts of irregularities, is not more important than the eight preceding plays. Especially not when we’re talking about projecting future performance. Even if it’s concentrated in two runs, or in one run and three somewhat successful runs, it’s not proof that play call is successful. Which isn’t to say the Giants aren’t successful running counters, only that I’m not convinced.
I’m glad people are recording this kind of information, but NFL fans should be very canny about statistics they read. A stat, and especially a barrage of stats, is as likely to mislead as any jargon-filled BS. Stats, in their own way, have become the new jargon, and if you can’t be sure what they mean, it’s often best to assume they’re meaningless.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 1:59 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I realize this thread is about the Giant's line but...
John, have you done any looking at how the Hawk’s line sizes up against the Giants front 4? Specifically the change back to Locklear at RT. We had a couple good games on the ground with Willis in, albeit againt the 49ers and Rams, but how does the shift back to Locklear affect this? In your video analysis, have you seen any major differences between Locklear and Willis, does each excel in different areas, or how does their play stack up against one another?
by Badical Turbo Radness on
Sep 30, 2008 2:06 PM PDT
up
0 recs
YPA with that sample size
is as silly as BA/OBP/SLG with a sample size of twenty ABs.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 2:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Which brings me to another question
In baseball it often takes a season or more of data before we can come to a reasonable conclusion about a player’s ability. What is an appropriate sample size for evaluating players? A season worth of data?
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 2:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm never sure I absolutely know a player, I just try to define qualities.
But it must be said, the closest thing to DIPS in football is probably turnovers. Unlike baseball, where hitter and pitcher performance is HUGELY dependent on the outcome of batted balls, something we know to be heavily dependent on chance, something like engaging or shedding a blocker, picking the right hole, throwing an accurate pass, etc. isn’t nearly as luck based, so the sample size needed is smaller. So, I can be reasonably sure of a player’s ability after a couple of games.
The big wild cards, and the reason I say I never absolutely know a player is opponent adjustment and injury. Applying opponent adjustment to scouting is mental gymnastics, and, I admit, somewhat intuition. Ideally, I could apply a performance rating to every player on every play. So we would know that a, say, 30 yard completion was not so much the receiver’s “C” rated (or whatever) route running, but the corners “F” rated coverage (i.e. falling down).
Injury is the thing that keeps players abilities in flux, even play to play. The sheer number of unreported, but debilitating aches and pains suffered in game make every game unpredictable. The sheer number of performance changing injuries throughout a player’s career means every player is sort of anew every game.
Which is one the reasons I am not as intolerant at Field Gulls as I might be if I ran a baseball blog. There’s just too much room to be wrong, at best one can be informed.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 2:35 PM PDT
up
0 recs
It seems to me that the Hawks biggest worry
should be counter and misdirection stuff with Bradshaw. The Hawks quickness and sometimes tendency to over pursue combined with Bradshaw’s ability to cut back and change direction could get ugly.
I’ve watched two of the Giants games this year and it seems like their best all around rusher is Derrick Ward. I’ve really enjoyed watching him play. He seems like he might have the power to get through some off our weaker tacklers and the quickness to take advantage of any blown containment.
by Nate Dogg on Sep 29, 2008 4:36 PM PDT 0 recs
I’ve also brought up the fact that Ward is a not-too-distant second in touches for a Giants’ running back and that I think we could see a lot of him, even though Jacobs is the #1. Ward has put up good numbers with the looks he’s had. For some reason, John has downplayed Ward’s role in the posts we’ve discussed it, and again here. Not sure why.
by Misfit74 on
Sep 29, 2008 5:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Not downplaying.
I just don’t have as much info on Ward and am attempting to minimize my “talking out my ass”.
by John Morgan on
Sep 29, 2008 5:20 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Haha
Best answer you possibly could have.
I have also been wondering about Ward, considering what he has done with his runs and receptions this season.
by cashless on
Sep 29, 2008 5:53 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If Jacobs gets into the second level..
He may not outrun our DB’s, but he’ll run OVER them. You really think Brian Russell, or for that matter Deon Grant is going to be able take him down if it’s him running full speed versus one of them? Don’t think so….
Your analysis is good, but assumes that our gaps will be filled. If their O-line gets him a wide open lane (as in the footage you showed us….o, and by the way their line is pretty damn good), we’re in trouble. Guarantee we’re in trouble. We are not a big defense. We are a quick, athletic, fast defense, but taking down a 270 lbs. RB going full speed at the second or third level is not our forte.
by kmedic on Sep 29, 2008 10:04 PM PDT 0 recs
You're assuming he'll be moving full speed
Against any defense, Brandon Jacobs with a head of steam is going to run over them. The key is getting to him before a play develops, and Seattle’s quickness should allow for that. Our safeties aren’t special in that they will likely be flattened by Jacobs loose in the secondary, LaRon Landry showed that and he comes Morgan approved. But our front seven is predicated on getting into the backfield and thats where Jacobs most vulnerable.
by Nate Dogg on
Sep 29, 2008 10:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Well...
RB going full speed at the second or third level…
Isn’t really anyone’s forte. Even if Seattle isn’t making a ton of tackles for a loss, it should avoid allowing Jacobs a clean release into the second and third level.
And I understand it’s annoying to be corrected, but BrianL is right about reply and subject lines. It makes discussions easier to follow.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 1:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well that's a pretty big assumption
If you haven’t noticed, the Giants offensive line is very good, so to assume that we are going to be in the backfield all day is nonsense. Yes, we have a very good front 7 ourselves, but the record shows that that front 7 doesn’t especially play well on the road, on the east coast.
by kmedic on Sep 29, 2008 10:33 PM PDT 0 recs
Use of the subject line and reply button
helps to facilitate clear discussion.
Please use them.
by BrianL on
Sep 29, 2008 10:51 PM PDT
up
0 recs
God forbid you say please
…or at least not sound like a Grade Five hall monitor while you do it.
Yeesh, we weren’t all born on forums.
by djafrot on
Sep 30, 2008 2:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
See, I can be much more assholish about this.
What you’re seeing is me being nice.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 7:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You're a massive douche
House of Sparky - www.houseofsparky.com - Go Sun Devils
by ASUBoyd on
Sep 30, 2008 9:38 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Wow.
Zero to banned just like that.
I’m amazed I must say this, but calling another commenter a “massive douche” is not allowed.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
At least make him take off that hat.
Screw you, Mariners. I'm back in football's loving arms.
by kevin_ess on
Sep 30, 2008 10:03 AM PDT
up
0 recs

You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on
Sep 30, 2008 1:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm not a Seahawks fan, but I had to join just to say:
Hahahahahahahaha!!!!
Fear the NPE
by thewyrm on
Sep 30, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
It's incredible that he made one community so upset that they came over to another just to celebrate his banning...
by seattlebruin on
Sep 30, 2008 10:11 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm not going to lie, his meltdowns were very amusing
I would have paid money to watch his reaction during the ASU-UNLV game a few weeks back
by seattlebruin on
Sep 30, 2008 10:15 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I am relatively new here...
but I’ve got to say your banning habits are much more logical than USSMariner.
I apparently managed getting banned there, but I still don’t know why, other than being chosen out of the lot on the thread they had on the Sonics leaving, for my ranting against Stern and Bennett. I guess I lost the coin flip of appropriateness.
Their comments weren’t really my cup of tea anyway. Too smarmy, too snarky, and ganging up on the new guys that don’t have PhD’s in sabermetrics. I was a Deadspin commentator frequently a couple years ago, then I got a life and job that didn’t allow me to frequent. That was more my style. Horribly inappropriate in a beautifully funny way, with less math required.
Anyway, I just cannot believe how much I love your site in general and how once found it has become a routine part of my daily readings. I love my Hawks… they’re all I have left…
Finally, though— what were the ASU guy’s meltdowns like? Cause I can melt down with the best of them, to be certain. But I try to avoid calling others douche if at all possible, unless absolutely warranted.
You really think I'll become a bronco fan if I live in Denver long enough? Why, when it is so much fun watching your team suck and mine rock!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on
Sep 30, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The USSM had to crack down because of the sheer amount of trolls that would frequent the site.
I don’t have a great understanding of sabermetrics yet I don’t feel unwelcome there. The USSM (like Lookout Landing or Field Gulls) is doesn’t tolerate blatant trolls, and as long as you’re not being a jerk you’re not going to get banned.
In short, don’t be mean or stupid. It’s okay to question things, but you have to present it in an honest manner. Act like an ass and chances are you’ll get banned.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 12:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I understand your perspective..
and disagree. But part of the problem for me is being “old school” with live baseball experience above and beyond a classroom. I had 4 years high school coaching experience with 2 league championships at my level where I had full autonomy (Frosh) and on the varsity staff with 3 more.
While I value the statistical side of things, there are also answers that come only from being there, and I’m unwilling to discredit that perspective. That being said, I still read the main posts, I just avoid the sycophantic comment threads now.
The authors weren’t so much my problem, the smarmy-ass moderation was. But that’s neither here nor there.
You really think I'll become a bronco fan if I live in Denver long enough? Why, when it is so much fun watching your team suck and mine rock!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on
Sep 30, 2008 1:20 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The USSM has never advocated to do away with traditional scouting.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 1:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
To be perfectly honest
I’ve never felt welcome at USS mariner either
You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on
Sep 30, 2008 1:34 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Fair enough.
I respectfully submit this is not the time or place to discuss the moderation at USSMariner.
Thanks.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 2:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Keep in mind before this goes too far
the people who frequent LL and USSM are there because they (we?) love baseball. Nearly all of us played baseball and are into baseball. We simply see the game from a different point of view now, one in which statistical analysis and the truth of numbers allows us to analytically and unemotionally evaluate the relative contributions of players.
We’re not out to make baseball a pure simulation game or anything like that. We just love baseball (and in most of our cases, love football too)
by seattlebruin on
Sep 30, 2008 3:21 PM PDT
up
0 recs
what...
john said above.
i know i was the one that started it, but i’m not going to continue the threadjack….
You really think I'll become a bronco fan if I live in Denver long enough? Why, when it is so much fun watching your team suck and mine rock!!!
by whiskey chainsaw on
Sep 30, 2008 5:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Not your fault.
I think you’ve been pretty civil and it’s not really hard to hit reply. I just haven’t had the time to monitor the site, but that’s changing now. I want to be inclusive, but the troll ratio on FG has gotten out of hand. I won’t hector people off the site, because I’m not a sadist and I don’t have the time, but I’m dusting off the ban hammer.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 10:09 AM PDT
up
0 recs
And lo, the wrath of John Morgan descended upon Field Gulls...
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 10:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
This reminds me of a time...
when I beat up this kid who was stalking my then girlfriend. It was her ex-boyfriend from before me. It wasn’t anything macho, I just pulled the kid off his bike, gave him a black eye (etc.) and made him promise to leave us alone. I know I’m not a badass, so this isn’t a “I’m a badass” story. Anyway, afterward all my girlfriend’s friends (guys) were cheering me on and excited and fired up and I was the complete opposite. I didn’t like hurting someone.
I’m happy it’s finally done, but I didn’t much like doing it.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 10:48 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The banhammer is a cruel but fair weapon.
I completely understand what you mean, though.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 10:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
well you must be doing a good job
because I rarely see trolls here, especially compared to other sports sites I frequent.
by djafrot on
Sep 30, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
hahahaha
Determined, Jonesing Commentor | Proud proprietor of Corcotopia and Washingtonhighways.org
by I'm NOT Corco on
Sep 30, 2008 10:05 AM PDT
up
0 recs
With Plaxico not playing this Sunday
should we expect new York to hit the ground more often than they have been?
by BrianL on Sep 30, 2008 10:22 AM PDT 0 recs
I'm still worried he'll get to play.
Screw you, Mariners. I'm back in football's loving arms.
by kevin_ess on
Sep 30, 2008 10:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I was under the impression that they had finally come to an agreement
He only loses one week’s worth of pay instead of two but has to sit against Seattle.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 10:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Thank god - the last I had heard was he had appealed. Good to know it wasn't merely a public slap on the wrist.
Screw you, Mariners. I'm back in football's loving arms.
by kevin_ess on
Sep 30, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
According to this article
They are close to a settlement that will cut his fine in half, but he still sits vs the Hawks. So nothing is a definite, but it sounds highly likely that there will be no Plax.
Remaining cautiously optimistic...
by Badical Turbo Radness on
Sep 30, 2008 10:31 AM PDT
up
0 recs
All the Giants fans are confident in their other receivers
I’m wondering how confident Manning is in his other receivers. Despite his miracle performace last year, Eli can still be rattled. I’m hoping for a full scale meltdown.
Couglin seems like the type of coach who isn’t going to let 1 absent player drastically affect the game planning (I’m not sure he actually calls the plays, but he probably has a prominent voice in their strategy for game day.) The Giants have the swagger of a SB winner and an undefeated team, and it seems like they wouldn’t let Plax’s absence skew their run/pass ratio to much.
Remaining cautiously optimistic...
by Badical Turbo Radness on
Sep 30, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The game will dictate that.
If it’s close or Giants lead, they’ll no doubt run, but if Seattle can build a cushion the Giants will have to pass. I’m pretty sure I would expect a fairly traditional gameplan to start, but if Eli is erratic, they’ll put more pressure on the ground game. The key for Seattle, as always, is get the score in your favor and force New York’s hand.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 10:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Has Eli's passing been as bad this season as I think it has been?
I remember watching the first game and seeing him consistently throw behind his receivers.
by BrianL on
Sep 30, 2008 10:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I still think Eli is a below average quarterback.
One step above quarterbacks who meltdown under pressure. The argument that winning a Super Bowl has somehow systemically changed him as a quarterback is tantamount to the argument that Jeff Weaver became an ace after his World Series performance with the Cardinals. Eli’s team won the Super Bowl, Manning himself is still about the 15th+ quarterback I’d chose to build a franchise around.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 10:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
15? Really?
Seems that given his relative youth and impeccable bloodlines, you could pick a worse guy to build around.
Or is this more of a here and now type deal rather than a now and five years from now kind of thing?
by seattlebruin on
Sep 30, 2008 3:23 PM PDT
up
0 recs
He did look terrible against the Skins in week 1
But other than that, he’s looked, to me, like traditional Eli. A streaky, hot then cold, passer
Remaining cautiously optimistic...
by Badical Turbo Radness on
Sep 30, 2008 10:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I have such a better answer to this question now.
In about five minutes.
by John Morgan on
Sep 30, 2008 1:04 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Ware playing this week?
Since Ware was arrested for standing in the middle of the road while drunk, any chance that he’ll be out this weekend?
by crnchber on Sep 30, 2008 12:48 PM PDT 0 recs
Normally the NFL
Won’t hand out suspension till they’re convicted of a crime. The team might punish him though.
You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on
Sep 30, 2008 1:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Hey so I finally got the keys to my house.
So I’m taking off work the next 3 days and won’t have the internets till monday at my house. So I’m out the rest of this week. So Pip you want to handle the Video Preview?
You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 30, 2008 1:40 PM PDT 0 recs





