San Francisco 49ers reached agreement with former Giants running back Brandon Jacobs.

[maniax]

I'm not crazy about the signing because we only have $6M in cap space, so that little extra money I'd rather use on a better veteran RG or a better veteran NT. Instead, we are probably giving $1M or $1.5M to a 3rd string running back that is useless on special teams and with Gore and Hunter healthy, he won't see the field much.

 

[Heathbar012]

I'm not crazy about the signing because we only have $6M in cap space, so that little extra money I'd rather use on a better veteran RG or a better veteran NT. Instead, we are probably giving $1M or $1.5M to a 3rd string running back that is useless on special teams and with Gore and Hunter healthy, he won't see the field much.

That is something that cannot be counted on. It is amazing he has had as many touches as he has in the NFL. If he didn't have his injury history, he would be a first ballot Hall of Famer (could still be with a ring or two), but that load would be a lot to put on Hunter and Dixon. This is an insurance, low-risk, high reward move. Like others have said, if he is ineffective or a distraction, he will be cut. Yes, there would still be a cap hit, but only for this year. Smart move. Depth is key in the NFL.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Puzzling move. We just a signed an older, softer, louder, and quite possibly an even dumber version of Anthony Dixon. At least Dixon is a pretty decent special teams player.

This is an extremely deep RB draft class. Why not bring in a 4th, 5th, or 6th rounder to compete with Dixon instead? A guy like Terrance Ganaway or Robert Turbin run with more leg drive than both Jacobs and Dixon, and they're much younger and less distracting than Jacobs.

Seems like a move just to make a move. Boo.

 

[h0ckeysk83r]

Brandon Jacobs - RB - 49ers 49ers agreed to terms with Brandon Jacobs, formerly of the Giants, on a one-year contract.
Jacobs is joining Randy Moss and former Giants teammate Mario Manningham as offensive additions in San Francisco. The 49ers will remain a run-dominant offense, with Jacobs perhaps handling the majority of the short-yardage and goal-line work, putting a dent in Frank Gore's fantasy value. Should Gore miss time, though, the more explosive Kendall Hunter would remain the back to own. Anthony Dixon appears to be the odd man out of the backfield picture.


Kendall Hunter - RB - 49ers According to CSN Bay Area's Matt Maiocco, Brandon Jacobs was signed in large part because the 49ers "don't have confidence in" Anthony Dixon and view Kendall Hunter as a "change-of-pace" back.
We had already dumped Dixon, owner of a per-carry average of 3.3 in two years, even in deep Dynasty leagues. The 49ers will ditch him next. While we remain high on Hunter's ability, his Dynasty value is capped by the coaching staff's view that he's a complementary back as a opposed to a lead runner

 

[ChrisPozz]

Semi excited about the move but there's a whole lot of fear in me as well. I was always puzzled with the way NYG utilized him. The spots and situations they put him in didn't make sense to me quite a few times that I watched him. I saw far from all NYG games but he always looked better as a 2nd or 3rd back, especially in short yardage, than the numbers indicated and part of that was the way that NYG used him in my opinion.

The move also made me laugh a little bit as well because since Jacobs came in the league I've been screaming to anybody that will listen to me that the 49ers need a big time short yardage guy in the mold of a Brandon Jacobs. I would actually use his name. "Mold" size wise. The mouth, attitude, head, etc., is another story and that's what concerns me the most. Anyways, it's just funny to me that I'd always use Jacobs' name/size and now they actually have signed Brandon Jacobs himself.

 

[Heathbar012]

Puzzling move. We just a signed an older, softer, louder, and quite possibly an even dumber version of Anthony Dixon. At least Dixon is a pretty decent special teams player.

This is an extremely deep RB draft class. Why not bring in a 4th, 5th, or 6th rounder to compete with Dixon instead? A guy like Terrance Ganaway or Robert Turbin run with more leg drive than both Jacobs and Dixon, and they're much younger and less distracting than Jacobs.

Seems like a move just to make a move. Boo.

Not if this move allows them to focus on getting deeper at other positions in those rounds. This is a stop-gap move. Next years' first rounder will be as late or later than this years'. That can be a good time to get a great athlete at RB (if not the 2nd or 3rd). It will be interesting to see if Frank can stay healthy effective for an entire season with 20 touches per game. I'm certainly not a huge Jacobs fan for the reasons that you and others have listed, but I like the move because it can help Gore's longevity, push Dixon and develop Hunter. There are guys like Ganaway, Turbin, Polk and Martin in every draft. More picks for OL, DL, WR/TE and secondary depth will be appreciated.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Not if this move allows them to focus on getting deeper at other positions in those rounds. This is a stop-gap move. Next years' first rounder will be as late or later than this years'. That can be a good time to get a great athlete at RB (if not the 2nd or 3rd). It will be interesting to see if Frank can stay healthy effective for an entire season with 20 touches per game. I'm certainly not a huge Jacobs fan for the reasons that you and others have listed, but I like the move because it can help Gore's longevity, push Dixon and develop Hunter. There are guys like Ganaway, Turbin, Polk and Martin in every draft. More picks for OL, DL, WR/TE and secondary depth will be appreciated.

This move doesn't mean we're getting deeper at RB. This move means that, in all likelyhood, Jacobs replaces Dixon on the roster.

 

[EaseUrStorm]

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a late round RB pick in this mold added to get some hyper-competition going. We could always try and stash that guy on the PS. Have the feeling a similar approach will be at G with Kilgore, some vet who gets cut loose in June, and a rookie.

 

[Flyingiguana]

I'd say above average rather than good. He converted just over half of his 3rd and short carries last year. He'll occasionally have a run where he uses his size and power effectively, but it's too infrequent for my taste. Like Dixon, I think he runs like a guy who weighs 50 pounds less than he does. Or he tries to.

The staff doesn't seem to love Dixon, and I can't blame them too much for that, but he and Jacobs seem similar to me in terms of running style. Jacobs is more effective today, but he's also five years and 973 touches older.

he seemed to play better later in the year, especially when bradshaw came back.

 

[Heathbar012]

This move doesn't mean we're getting deeper at RB. This move means that, in all likelyhood, Jacobs replaces Dixon on the roster.

He could still make the team on ST. The wrecking crew of Spillman/Costanzo/Dixon can be replaced by Spillman/Cartwright/Dixon. I have no problem with any of Byham/Hastings/Bogan getting cut. Jacobs is a better running back than Dixon right now. That improves depth.

 

[clyde_carbon]

He could still make the team on ST. The wrecking crew of Spillman/Costanzo/Dixon can be replaced by Spillman/Cartwright/Dixon. I have no problem with any of Byham/Hastings/Bogan getting cut. Jacobs is a better running back than Dixon right now. That improves depth.

There's no way we're keeping Gore, Hunter, Jacobs, Miller, Cartwright, and Dixon on the roster. That would defeat the entire purpose of trying to get deep somewhere else.

Dixon is the odd man out.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Gotta hope better run blocking and health show us the good Jacobs this season.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

we'll there was a discussion about giants line blocking worse than ours, i guess we will see if our line helps him

I'm not sure Jacobs' production will answer that. Totally different situations. Teams rarely crowd the box against the Giants like they do against us. We'd envision Jacobs as a short-yardage back, but the Giants didn't really use him that way. He also started six games this season, which would be something of a worst-case scenario for us.

My biggest problem with this move is the age. He's old and washed up. Dixon has disappointed to date, but if we want to replace him, let's go younger, as Clyde said.

 

[Heathbar012]

There's no way we're keeping Gore, Hunter, Jacobs, Miller, Cartwright, and Dixon on the roster. That would defeat the entire purpose of trying to get deep somewhere else.

Dixon is the odd man out.

I apologize. I wasn't clear enough in my last post. Either scenario (as unlikely as one might be), are fine with me. Jacobs is still a more reliable back than Dixon to split carries with Hunter when/if Gore goes down. That is the definition of improved depth. Not to mention, the depth at other positions will improve based on using better picks for players at those spots. A solid rookie RB will be there next year, and I'm assuming Jacobs will not be a Niner in 2013, no matter what he does in 2012 (because he will have either been cut, served his purpose or exceeded expectations and want too much money for his last NFL seasons).

Either way, it's a stop-gap move in hopes of finding Goldson's replacement (or Justin Smith's replacement or depth at RG, etc.) in this year's draft. No matter what, there is a plan, and this is not a move just to make a move. The Warriors' sign and trade for David Lee. That was a move just to make a move. This one has very little downside, in comparison. In general, moves just to make a move are pretty rare in the NFL. Low guarantees and cuts make for less of a negative impact.

(Edited for grammar mistakes)

 

[Crimsoncrew]

he seemed to play better later in the year, especially when bradshaw came back.

That could be. I only saw him a few times. I can live with the move, but I don't like adding a 30+ RB at all, much less when we have a younger player who is somewhat similar and a much better STs player on the roster.

 

[clyde_carbon]

I apologize. I wasn't clear enough in my last post. Either scenario (as unlikely as one might be), are fine with me. Jacobs is still a more reliable back than Dixon to split carries with Hunter when/if Gore goes down. That is the definition of improved depth. Not to mention, the depth at other positions will improve based on using better picks for players at those spots. A solid rookie RB will be there next year, and I'm assuming Jacobs will not be a Niner in 2013, no matter what he does in 2012 (because he will have either been cut, served his purpose or exceeded expectations and want too much money for his last NFL seasons).

Either way, it's a stop-gap move in hopes of finding Goldson's replacement (or Justin Smith's replacement or depth at RG, etc.) in this year's draft. No matter what, there is a plan, and this is not a move just to make a move. The Warriors' sign and trade for David Lee. That was a move just to make a move. This one has very little downside, in comparison. In general, moves just to make a move are pretty rare in the NFL. Low guarantees and cuts make for less of a negative impact.

(Edited for grammar mistakes)

That may be true, but we could've gotten the same thing in the draft, without the edgy locker room dynamics that will be added.

 

[Heathbar012]

That could be. I only saw him a few times. I can live with the move, but I don't like adding a 30+ RB at all, much less when we have a younger player who is somewhat similar and a much better STs player on the roster.

That will be the bummer, but I have to assume that any late-round safety or linebacker prospect is just as hungry to make a name for himself on STs (and hopefully learn from our amazing D to take over in a year or 2).

 

[h0ckeysk83r]

He had 7 rushing TD's last yr. He will be a big upgrade in our red zone/goal line packages.

 

[Heathbar012]

That may be true, but we could've gotten the same thing in the draft, without the edgy locker room dynamics that will be added.

Noted and your take is completely valid. My only disagreement was with your final assessment that the move is solely lateral and just for the sake of activity. A slight loss in STs play (if there is a drop-off), is not a reason to avoid (even only moderately) improving RB depth because it can lead to improved depth at other positions, through the draft. This move mostly tells me that there wasn't a projected 4th or 5th round RB that the front office is particularly fond of. However, there may be a S, CB, DE or G that they do see as a potential sleeper. If a RB that they really like, in this years' draft, drops for some reason, they can cut both Jacobs and Dixon for all I care. Last years special teams coverage was exceptional, but not irreplaceable. The same can be said for Jacobs' game, but at this point, he is fighting for his last contract and still has more in the tank (two years from now, not so much). If he wants to fuck that up, that is on him, and the cap hit is minimal.

Also, I think adding Moss and Cox was already going to make things at least a little edgy in the locker room. It seems Jacobs was most concerned about playing time. If Gore goes down, no complaints. If Gore doesn't go down and Jacobs complains, he gets cut and the Niners win the Super Bowl behind a great year by Gore (barring other significant injuries on the team, of course). Seems win-win to me (except maybe for Anthony Dixon - actually, if he ends up getting a better shot with another team, that could be a win for him, too - I don't foresee the Niners ever regretting the [likely] decision to cut Dixon. They can pick up another player just like him in the third [or later] round next year, though I assume they'll be looking for a little more talent at that point).

 

[numone9er]

Semi excited about the move but there's a whole lot of fear in me as well. I was always puzzled with the way NYG utilized him. The spots and situations they put him in didn't make sense to me quite a few times that I watched him. I saw far from all NYG games but he always looked better as a 2nd or 3rd back, especially in short yardage, than the numbers indicated and part of that was the way that NYG used him in my opinion.

The move also made me laugh a little bit as well because since Jacobs came in the league I've been screaming to anybody that will listen to me that the 49ers need a big time short yardage guy in the mold of a Brandon Jacobs. I would actually use his name. "Mold" size wise. The mouth, attitude, head, etc., is another story and that's what concerns me the most. Anyways, it's just funny to me that I'd always use Jacobs' name/size and now they actually have signed Brandon Jacobs himself.

I agree. I was saying the same thing. His running style fits what our Offense is trying to do. He can help us pick up the tough yards that are hard to come by as well as working into more carries when Gore goes down (it happens every year).