Speculation: Could Harbaugh be making Jacobs suffer in idle because of the leak? | Page 4

Nov 7, 2012 at 4:14 PM

#46

9ersLiferInChicago
Veteran
Posts: 10,069

Leak? What did I miss?

Nov 7, 2012 at 4:35 PM

#47

NinerPrideinNJ
Veteran
Posts: 4,116

Mods gotta lock this up. This title is assuming, misleading, and above all, false according to all current knowledge.

Nov 7, 2012 at 4:49 PM

#48

schmons
Veteran
Posts: 3,145

did any of the reporters ask harbaugh about jacobs playing time during the press conference or did they ask a bunch of useless waste of questions again?

Nov 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

#49

AXEGRINDER
Veteran
Posts: 25,671

Originally posted by schmons:
did any of the reporters ask harbaugh about jacobs playing time during the press conference or did they ask a bunch of useless waste of questions again?

I was hoping Murph and Mac would ask him but they have zero balls. I think they're afraid of him actually.

[ Edited by AXEGRINDER on Nov 7, 2012 at 4:54 PM ]

Nov 7, 2012 at 4:53 PM

#50

GolittaCamper
Veteran
Posts: 7,277

Hey, I like this thread, it's kinda free and open ended, we can speculate as to why Jacobs does't play, is it the mystery leak, or does he secretly suck, or is he really just an insurance policy like the front office said when they signed him...I you lock it we will never know...

Nov 7, 2012 at 5:07 PM

#51

NinerPrideinNJ
Veteran
Posts: 4,116

There has never, ever been any indication, rumor, or report that there was info leaked from Jacobs to the Giants.

Titling it "because of the leak" should be changed to "because of a possible leak".

If not, shut this thing down. It's stirring up a non-existent story for no reason. This is worse than the media.

Nov 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM

#52

RonMexico
Moderator
Posts: 74,747

Originally posted by Marsh:

Originally posted by RonMexico:
Kaep > Alex

damn right

Nov 7, 2012 at 7:24 PM

#53

NTeply49
Veteran
Posts: 1,588

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
No, if coach thought there was a leak, he would, cut or trade him instantly. I think this has more to do with assistant head coach Sealy, and special teams. He lost Blake Casanzo, and needs Dixon on special teams. If LMJ had shown from the start that he could return kicks offs, punts, and line up at slot receiver, I think both Ginn, and Williams would be gone from the game day roster, and one would more than likely be off the team.Having two non-starters eat up roster space just to return kicks is killing Jacobs chances with this team.

I don't think we will have Jacobs, Williams, James, and Ginn on the roster next season.

James will stay for sure

Nov 7, 2012 at 10:17 PM

#54

GolittaCamper
Veteran
Posts: 7,277

Originally posted by NTeply49:

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
No, if coach thought there was a leak, he would, cut or trade him instantly. I think this has more to do with assistant head coach Sealy, and special teams. He lost Blake Casanzo, and needs Dixon on special teams. If LMJ had shown from the start that he could return kicks offs, punts, and line up at slot receiver, I think both Ginn, and Williams would be gone from the game day roster, and one would more than likely be off the team.Having two non-starters eat up roster space just to return kicks is killing Jacobs chances with this team.

I don't think we will have Jacobs, Williams, James, and Ginn on the roster next season.

James will stay for sure

Me to, I ment we won't have all of them.

Nov 8, 2012 at 11:36 AM

#55

Mr.Mcgibblets
Veteran
Posts: 15,079

Short-yardage stats explain why Jacobs still sitting

http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2012/11/08/the-stats-explain-why-jacobs-is-still-sitting/

Why in the world haven't the 49ers used short-yardage behemoth Brandon Jacobs this season? The 264-pound back referred that question to Jim Harbaugh this week, but the answer can be found in the numbers: The 49ers are doing just fine in short-yardage situations without him.

San Francisco has converted 9 of 13 opportunities (69.2) when its called run plays on third- or fourth-and-short (two yards or fewer) situations this season. In fact, the 49ers have collected first downs on nine of their past 10 such short-yardage situations, including seven in a row.

(also has a good breakdown in the link)

Nov 8, 2012 at 1:10 PM

#56

qnnhan7
Veteran
Posts: 34,157

Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
Short-yardage stats explain why Jacobs still sitting

http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2012/11/08/the-stats-explain-why-jacobs-is-still-sitting/

Why in the world haven't the 49ers used short-yardage behemoth Brandon Jacobs this season? The 264-pound back referred that question to Jim Harbaugh this week, but the answer can be found in the numbers: The 49ers are doing just fine in short-yardage situations without him.

San Francisco has converted 9 of 13 opportunities (69.2) when its called run plays on third- or fourth-and-short (two yards or fewer) situations this season. In fact, the 49ers have collected first downs on nine of their past 10 such short-yardage situations, including seven in a row.

(also has a good breakdown in the link)

This confirmed what I was seeing from the game without looking at the numbers. We've been good on 3rd and short lately. Most likely the main reason Jacobs isn't seeing anytime so far. Good by the offense

Nov 8, 2012 at 11:47 PM

#57

49erswillbeback
Member
Posts: 776

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Jacobs is a 260 pound b***h

YEP!

Nov 9, 2012 at 1:49 AM

#58

adamcarrillo17
Member
Posts: 43

Cut Brandon Jacobs and Save some Cap Space for Next Season..Idk why we signed him in the first Place

Nov 9, 2012 at 6:47 PM

#59

Mercuryspeed
Veteran
Posts: 136

Originally posted by sacniner:
Yeah, it's a bye week

Yeah I'm losing the little I had left. Over here.

Nov 9, 2012 at 6:51 PM

#60

Mercuryspeed
Veteran
Posts: 136

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:
Mods gotta lock this up. This title is assuming, misleading, and above all, false according to all current knowledge.

Being my thread I think it is time to stop the madness. I was fun fodder to peddle but I think its run it's short course.