- Thread starter
- #1
So a few weeks ago I started a thread about how I wouldn't bring Ginn back next year because he is very replaceable. Well, if he had played Sunday, we'd have one more game this year.
But I stand by what I said. Ted Ginn wasn't the difference in the game. Kyle Williams was. It wasn't explosive ST plays that were lacking (after the muff, Williams had a very nice return). It was his inability to protect the ball (and stay away from it).
I am much more bothered by the ball that hit his knee than the fumble. Fumbles happen. He could have protected it more, but at least on that one the Giants had to make a good play to get the ball. On the muff, the Giants didn't have to do anything.
I stand by what I said about Ginn as a WR, and I feel any experienced PR would have put us in the Super Bowl simply by understanding the nature of PR and not getting lost in the moment.
I feel we can upgrade significantly at WR from Ginn (and we need to upgrade at WR) without taking a serious hit at PR.
And no, I would not sign DeSean Jackson.
But I stand by what I said. Ted Ginn wasn't the difference in the game. Kyle Williams was. It wasn't explosive ST plays that were lacking (after the muff, Williams had a very nice return). It was his inability to protect the ball (and stay away from it).
I am much more bothered by the ball that hit his knee than the fumble. Fumbles happen. He could have protected it more, but at least on that one the Giants had to make a good play to get the ball. On the muff, the Giants didn't have to do anything.
I stand by what I said about Ginn as a WR, and I feel any experienced PR would have put us in the Super Bowl simply by understanding the nature of PR and not getting lost in the moment.
I feel we can upgrade significantly at WR from Ginn (and we need to upgrade at WR) without taking a serious hit at PR.
And no, I would not sign DeSean Jackson.