28 Joker
28 Joker
- Messages
- 7,878
- Reaction score
- 1
Temo;2413351 said:
Anthony Henry gave up a huge play to Fitzgerald on a jump ball. Jenkins has very long arms and had a chance to make that play. Go back and look at it. Henry got beat on a post route for a TD, in that game, on another play. He got beat deep for a TD in the Rams game. He has no chance covering deep post routes.
Mike Jenkins has played some good football. Teams have tested him, but they have not picked on him at all. He is just learning the NFL game and a new system. He has been very good next to those sidelines. The other teams have attacked him with in-cuts, because they are not having success throwing on him from the numbers to the sidelines. That is where Champ Bailey and Asante Samuel live. Again, teams have not been able to beat him deep or pick on him next to the sidelines. Teams are attacking Jenkins (with in-cuts) like the Giants attacked Asante Samuel. Jenkins, like Samuel, is a great north and south player. He can break on a ball in a hurry, and he can run with you. Plus, he has catch up speed. I'll say it again. Jenkins is a bigger, stronger, and faster version of Samuel, imo. Jenkins gives you much needed speed (4.38) and more size. Jenkins has played better and better with each game.
According to a DMN writer, Jenkins had 'plenty of sins' in the Giants game, however, if you get past the biased agenda of some at the DMN, you get an up and down game from him. There were several positive plays to go with some negative ones. Yet, we are led to believe he played absolutely terrible, but that wasn't the case.
In the Giants game, Jenkins had an up and down game. Here are some of the main plays:
First, Jenkins gave up a 22 yard post route, out of the slot, in the Giants game. However, he was close to Burress by the end of the play. Jenkins isn't a slot player, imo. I don't know why Scandrick wasn't on him on the inside. Jenkins could probably match up with bigger receivers like Burress on the inside, but I would have left him on the sidelines where he has played very well. Plus, he was making his third start.
Second, He made a great play and jumped what should have been a curl route by Buress and took it back for six. I have read where some people say it was luck... He read a three step drop and plant, and he read Manning's eyes. Manning was under pressure on the play, and he wanted the ball out. It was instincts by Jenkins and a great play. Burress missed the blitz audible according to Larry Brown.
Third, Jenkins made a great hit on Sinoris Moss on 3rd and 4 and forced a punt.
Fourth, He had great coverage on Amonte Toomer on a deep fly pattern and forced an incompletion. He had him covered like a blanket.
Fifth, he gave up a TD on a bunch formation but Scandrick did, too. Hmm.
That is three positive plays, and there were some other plays where Jenkins had good coverage when Manning looked his way first. Cornerbacks never get any credit for those.
Sixh, ..."the Play" where some can say with absolute certainty that he 'quit'. I have no problem giving him the benefit of the doubt on that play. There is some grey area on that play. I don't think he quit. I'm not a mind reader. I've never played in an NFL game and seen NFL speed. IMO, I just think he froze on that play. I said it before Jenkins said the same thing. Jenkins didn't want to run into or take out Burnett on that play. It looked liked he hesitated due to the oncoming Burnett after playing outside contain on the play. It was over blown, and it is easliy corrected with experience.
Seventh, I think Burress caught an in-cut on him for about 10 yards, too.
Anyway, there were some positives in an up and down game for the young Mike Jenkins.
I'm not preaching at you. It is aimed at the writers at the DMN who read minds.
