News Archives

New York Giants’ Ahmad Bradshaw Will not Participate in OTAs or Mini-Camp

April 2nd, 2012 at 11:43 AM
By Dan Benton

The New York Giants offseason workout program begins in only two weeks, but running back Ahmad Bradshaw will not be participating. Following a non-surgical procedure in February, Bradshaw's plan is to take it easy for at least three months, meaning he'll be inactive for both Organized Team Activities (OTAs) and Mini-Camp.

Bradshaw's goal is to be completely ready for training camp and as close to 100% as he could possibly be; especially since he anticipates an increase in his workload due to the departure of Brandon Jacobs.

As it turns out, Bradshaw's "procedure" was actually an injection of bone marrow taken from his hip, with the sole purpose of generating new bone in his injured foot. Since the marrow was taken from his own body, he did not have to travel outside of the country (a la Kobe Bryant) to have it done. Instead, he had it done in North Carolina.

The five-year veteran also believes the Giants' running game is in fine shape with the backs they currently have. He doesn't feel they need any new recruits, but acknowledges that he'll have to step up vocally in the absence of Jacobs.

"I am not sure who they will bring in. Hopefully nobody," Bradshaw said.

Also…

Facebook Twitter Plusone Pinterest Linkedin Digg Delicious Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Posterous Email

Tags: Ahmad Bradshaw, Football, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

25 Responses to “New York Giants’ Ahmad Bradshaw Will not Participate in OTAs or Mini-Camp”

  1.  norm says:

    Coming soon to a Mini Camp near you:

    A sneak preview of the D.J. and Da’Rel Comedy Hour!!

    •  Krow says:

      DJ: There’s only two reasons a man will do something in the NFL – money and glory.
      Da’Rel: Hmmmm… Glory?
      DJ: Yeah. Why did George Washington cross the Delaware? Glory! Why did Napoleon go to Waterloo? Glory! And why did I, when I was 12 years old, ride the rapids of the Hudson River on a log when I coulda’ been killed?
      Da’Rel: Glory?
      DJ: Naw… just a fool kid!

      *apologies to Amos and Andy*

      •  norm says:

        And that bit is simply the warm-up. a mere preamble to the zany hi-jinks that will ensue once the duo steps on to the field and tickles your funny bone with their slapstick impersonations of NFL football players!

        It’s gold, Jerry! Gold!

  2.  GOAT56 says:

    I think we need to invest no less than a 3rd round pick into RB. I feel like with Bradshaw it’s like we are drafting a lead RB because Bradshaw’s lingering foot issues. This news in itsself isn’t bad because AB doesn’t need OTA’s. But it’s a reminder of just how fragile AB is and in turn our entire RB corps. In addition, I would invest a late round pick on a high upside prospect. Scott and Ware could be fine but they haven’t shown enough that they shouldn’t have to prove themselves to ensure roster spots.

    While many of us have pointed to young players like Prince, Jernigan and Williams as expected break out players the most important 2nd year player may be Scott. If Scott can play step up it really can alleviate some of our RB concerns. The hope is he would fill a Ware or more role but provide a lot more pop with his play. Ware is a solid player (I though he had more upside than he really does) but he’s not a player good enough to be a #2 RB. Maybe in a pinch but definitely not as the plan.

  3.  Chad Eldred says:

    Bradshaw is a solid guy for supporting his teammates. However, if Bradshaw misses a game for whatever reason, is there really anyone that is confident that Ware and Scott can threaten an opposing defense? Not to mention picking up a blitz. Drafting makes sense, yes, but incoming rookies usually have very little knowledge of pass protection. I hope whatever they injected Bradshaw with is magical.

  4.  norm says:

    NEW YORK—Despite an obvious display of enthusiasm for Tim Tebow’s arrival at his introductory press conference Monday, the New York Jets admitted this week to concerns he may become distracted by the city’s wild churchlife.

    “Manhattan offers worship services at all hours of the day, with some places bearing witness to the Good News till 4 a.m.—not to mention all those millions of nonbelievers walking around to convert—and a young player with a healthy thirst for Christianity could really have himself some fun here,” said Jets coach Rex Ryan, adding that the sheer number of churches in New York means Tebow could tithe himself into bankruptcy if he’s not careful. “In the past, he’s managed to keep his God habit in check and focus on football, but in a city where a pew is never more than a minute away, we don’t know if he’ll be able to resist the temptation.”

    Sources confirmed the Jets are making overtures to fellow Christian Kurt Warner to mentor Tebow, because the veteran once played in the city, and also because they do not have anybody who is good at quarterback.

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/jets-worry-tim-tebow-will-be-distracted-by-wild-ne,27799/

  5.  fanfor55years says:

    I do not understand why the revelation that Bradshaw has had bone marrow injected into his foot has suddenly got everyone in a tizzy. Nothing at all changed, folks. We all knew he had a bum foot before. In fact, this procedure, which is almost certainly part of a stem-cell treatment that is already proving quite valuable in damaged shoulders at the most advanced orthopedic practices around the world, is likely to, if anything, ameliorate the problem.

    Bradshaw will always be an injury risk. That hasn’t changed. Unfortunately, he seems also to be headed toward being a guy who cannot practice, which makes it a lot less likely he will successfully improve his shoddy vision and anticipation and will continue to be well less than elite because he continues to fail to find the right cutback lanes.

    I’ve said on a number of occasions that I have no reason, based on observation, to see Scott as more than another running back with pop who hasn’t got the lateral quickness that is so necessary in the NFL to become a real #1 back, but that I hope that the confidence expressed by the coaches in him proves justified and that I cannot see what’s right in front of me, because this team will NEED a significant contribution from him. I still expect Reese to draft a big running back who can run with power and to pick up an elusive one either late in the draft, through UDFA, or from late camp cuts, but for all any of us know these guys really think that Bradshaw, Scott, Ware and Brown are the answer. I think that’s only possible if Brown really is Rodney-Hampton-like (I thought he might be coming out of college) and Scott really has more lateral quicks than he has shown when on the field so far. But I readily admit that the coaches know a lot more than do we. Here’s hoping they know something we don’t about both of those guys.

    •  kujo says:

      No one is in a “tizzy.” But this article refocuses us on the chasmic hole that we have at RB. We let Jacobs take his talents and homoerotic endzone dance to San Francisco, and are left with the Guy with the Strawman Ankles (Bradshaw), and 2 relative nobodies in Ware and Scott. I don’t think we should spend a 1st or a 2nd round pick on a replacement, but a 3rd or 4th seems in order.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        I generally agree. Though, I think a 2nd round investment into a RB could be a good move. It depends on who’s available and highly we think of the RBs available at 63.

        I guess the real answer is some of us have been in “tizzy” and this news just gives us another chance to express it.

  6.  kujo says:

    The past three weeks have entailed plenty of talk about the salary cap as calculated in the new CBA, and whether and to what extent those numbers will spike when the new TV contracts kick in.

    The NFLPA reportedly has told players it will. Patriots owner Robert Kraft has said that it won’t.

    Now, Texans owner Bob McNair, who chairs the league’s finance committee, agrees with Kraft.

    “It is staying pretty flat for several years,” McNair told Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Journal while departing last week’s league meetings. McNair added that, after 2014, the cap will “gradually” increase.

    Kaplan’s report also confirms that the union borrowed against future years in order to pump the cap in 2012 from as low as $113 million per team to $120.6 million per team, not much more than the $120.375 million per team in 2011. The same thing will happen in 2013, which means that gains to be realized in 2014 and beyond will have already been, to a certain extent, consumed by the players in order to drive up the numbers in 2012 and 2013.

    The end result, per Kaplan, will be a total of $142.4 million per team in salary and benefits for each of the first three years of the new CBA, with modest annual increases thereafter.

    Kaplan points out that, last March, the players walked away from a proposal that would have guaranteed $146 million per team in 2012, $150 million per team in 2013, and $161 million per team in 2014. (Actually, the document created by the owners in March 2011, a copy of which PFT has obtained, showed a minimum of $148 million in 2012 and $155 million in 2013.) NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith called that offer the “worst deal in the history of sports,” in part because of the gross reduction in the players’ take and in part because the formula included no portion of the league’s financial upside.

    So, instead, the players eventually traded a proposal with a high floor and a low ceiling for a deal with a low floor and a high ceiling. And for now the numbers are congregating at the floor.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/02/worst-deal-in-the-history-of-sports-suddenly-looks-pretty-good/

    •  fanfor55years says:

      I mentioned the “slow-growth” cap a few weeks ago, and again a few days ago.

      But I still think the players made the right choice. Those revenues are going to eventually grow dramatically and now the players will get a better share. There should be a big increase around 2015 because of both TV and digital revenues. The owners are still being less than honest about all of that. They’re so desperate to make De Smith look bad that they’re living in la-la land.

      Tell me this: when the NFL puts a franchise in LA, which will happen within a few years, what will that do to total revenues in which the players share? Think about it. Re-opened deals with the networks, a huge increase in potential revenues through media-related deals for digital rights, etc., etc. Add to that the desperate need of the networks and the advertising community for one of the last pieces of “content” that still draws a huge audience at a fixed time and you quickly see that the lower floor-higher ceiling approach makes sense for the players.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      Interesting. But I don’t think it’s bad for the players. Actually, it’s great for fans because under that deal the NFL would be more like MLB, meaning a wider spread in speanding between good and bad teams. Teams like Washington and Dallas will always spend as much as they can. That deal would have been gold to us because we could probably easily keep MM and even extend Osi. But overall the current deal is better for the sport. For the players we really don’t know because the bottom teams really might not spend at all if they didn’t have to.

  7.  fanfor55years says:

    Totally off-topic, but is anyone else completely bemused by this hyping of Tannehill? Howard Cosell’s kid pronounces him a top prospect and suddenly people are mentioning him as a possible top-5 pick? Did they see him play? I saw him play two games. Five interceptions in those two and looked completely overmatched. This is the ESPN-ing of the world. They figure people are bored with Luck and Griffen by now and they’re on to another story. There will be someone else dug up before long. Tannehill’s 15-minutes may be almost over.

    Meanwhile, for three years I have said Andrew Luck will be the next great quarterback. Now he’s yesterday’s news, but don’t make the mistake of discounting that kid. He is a tremendous athlete, a smart kid, a prodigious worker, very ambitious and more than willing to learn. I actually think he was limited by Harbaugh. Not in a terrible way, but Harbaugh’s brief was to bring Stanford back to football respectability and he did a great job of doing that. He felt that the way forward was with excellent offensive linemen (partly because those dudes tend to be relatively smart so could squeeze into Stanford despite the Admissions Office’s refusal to lower standards very much despite Harbaugh’s constant entreaties….the VP Admissions was one of the few people around Stanford who absolutely hated Harbaugh and considered him a low-down Philistine) and a controlled offense. So Luck became a relatively conservative quarterback. Lots of dump-offs, lots of passes to backs leaking into the flats after the receivers had cleared out the zone. Not as many deep throws except when they had been carefully set up by previous play calls out of the same sets. It was a winning strategy, but it actually did not best showcase Luck. No error there on Harbaugh’s part, but if you ask people around the team you will be told that when allowed to cut loose in practices Luck made peoples eyes get wide because he was making NFL-throws when he was a red-shirt freshman.

    Now I’m hearing that some think he doesn’t have enough zip on his ball. Ha. Those people will see soon enough. I like RGIII, but anyone who thinks he should be picked ahead of Luck is outta his mind. And this new trend toward moving Tannehill up toward the precincts of the top two is madness. Pretty soon we’ll be hearing how smart it would be to draft a 29-year old quarterback in the second round because he’s mature so could play sooner at a high level. There are a lot of really dumb people populating the world of sports. Pay them no attention. They know as much about what they’re talking about as do the “analysts” who are predicting what our political centers will do in regard to the deficit and the economy, which is just about nothing. Bloviators get paid to bloviate. We don’t have to listen.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      I agree on Luck & RG3. I think RG3 has a lot of upside and maybe even more than Luck. But like with the cap situation is floor is much higher. Still RG3 in most years is the #1 pick.

      Tannehill being hyped I think is as much as he’s the consensus 3rd QB than his actual ability. I think last year’s draft is a big influence in his rise because no one thought that Looker or Ponder would go as high as they did. Tannehill being the 3rd QB and showing real upside even if it’s unproven gives Cleveland at 4 and Miami at 8 real pause. You could even compare him to Sanchez because he wasn’t expected to go as high as he did and is inexperienced.

  8.  norm says:

    Yes, it’s not exactly earth-shaking news that the guys on the Giants depth chart at running back are eerily reminiscent of the guys who wear floppy shoes, fright wigs, and tumble out of cars at shows produced by Ringling Brothers.

    Apart from the brittle Bradshaw, a brief recap:

    D.J. Ware: Journeyman. Good depth guy; great to have as your #4 or even #3 back. But s things presently stand, if Bradshaw goes down, he’d be the Giants’ #1 back. If that doesn’t scare the bejeezus outta ya, then nothing will.

    Da’Rel Scott: Unproven sophomore with questionable handle who’s shown nothing more than straight-line speed. Also: had trouble staying on the field while at Maryland. Unlikely prospect to carry a significant share of the RB workload.

    Andre Brown: Managed a whopping 3.2 yards per carry last preseason while presumably on the juice. Aspires to be half as good as D.J. Ware once clean. Goner.

    ‘tis a sad state of affairs, indeed. I doubt Reese waits around until the late rounds or relies on his superb dumpster diving skills to address this. As does GOAT56, I strongly suspect that running back will be among the Giants first three selections in the upcoming draft, perhaps as early as the first round.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      I’ll take that bet, if we’re talking first round.

      I figure second at earliest, more likely a third rounder whom they have already decided they want and will, if necessary, trade up with one of the 4th rounders to get.

      They have real needs at receiver and safety, and they have to bring in more pass-rushers and perhaps an ILB. Running back has now become a real need (it was the day Jacobs signed with the Niners), but there are others and if you look at where the Giants have generally found their backs they are not the big names from big schools and they are not drafted early.

      •  norm says:

        For the record, I don’t see a first round pick on a back as especially likely.

        But it would not surprise me, either. The way I see it, there should only be one back off the board (Richardson) by the time the Giants select at 32. They will almost certainly have the first pick of the “best of the rest.”

        The second round is usually when “runs” on running backs have typically occurred of late. If the Giants fear that the guy they like may not be on the board at 63, they may uncharacteristically pull the trigger on one at 32. Or, possibly, trade back into the early second round and use the first of their two 2nd rounders on a back.

  9.  norm says:

    One other thing to keep in mind when handicapping how early Reese will take a running back:

    This is the first year on Reese’s watch that the Giants have gone into a draft with an urgent, no-doubt-about it, need at that position. For the past three seasons, Jacobs and Bradshaw have had a stranglehold on the top two spots. During that time, the quality of their performance has ranged from “good” to “good enough.” This, in turn, allowed Reese the luxury of fishing for backs in the later rounds, the pool of UDFAs, and/or camp cuts. If one of them happened to work out, great. If not, he still had the security of knowing that one of his established top two could still do the job.

    Obviously, Reese no longer has that luxury this year. Whoever he brings in HAS to be productive… and do so fairly quickly as well. Is it possible that he can find that productive, NFL-ready back late in the draft or as a UDFA? Sure, it’s possible. But considering the urgency of the matter now before him, Reese may be less inclined to gamble on unearthing that “diamond in the rough.” Given that he’s now faced with the need of finding a “surer thing” for the first time in his career as GM, it seems quite likely that he’ll feel compelled to pull the trigger on a back much earlier than he has any time up until now.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      I agree, but I’d still be stunned if it’s a first pick. Anyone other than Richardson probably doesn’t justify that high a pick (unless our first pick is a second-rounder because we traded back).

      I think the sweet spot is a third round pick, but not as late as #95, at least if he is looking for a potential #1 back. But with two 4th round picks Reese can trade up toward the higher reaches of that third round. Somewhere in those first 65-75 picks he can probably get a guy he has targeted.

      I’m also sticking with my contention that if Reese/Ross go early for a tight end or an offensive lineman or a wide receiver, any one or two of those picks will help whomever they eventually pick as a RB do better. The O-lineman would only be picked early if they think he might actually be capable of starting. The receivers would soften up the defense and, in the case of the tight end, perhaps add a solid blocker as well.

      I really think that the Giants can afford to continue to be “good enough” at the RB position now that they clearly have an elite quarterback and passing game. The running game protected Eli for a number of seasons. Over the past few seasons he proved he doesn’t require that any longer. Getting a really top running game is now a luxury, one that would be very nice, but isn’t critical.

      •  GOAT56 says:

        To me the “good enough” approach at RB is because our roster had more pressing needs. Right now our roster doesn’t. We can still address some of our other needed area if we take a RB early. The midround WRs have plenty of upside. I think how the RBs are drafted is difficult to project between the second and 3rd rounds. I just see no need to “chance” missing the RB(s) we want by waiting 4th round or later when IMO it’s our biggest current need.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      Exactly

  10.  GOAT56 says:

    F55/Norm I look at positions like WR, Safety, LB, etc. as depth picks. But I think RB we need a player who we expect to play. I have way more confidence in Jernigan and Barden than Ware and Scott. Boley can help out at MLB and TT could help out at safety. But RB there’s no fall back.

    Now I still doubt we spend a 1st on a RB because of the value of RBs. Looking at the group one of the 2-5 RBs will likely be available at 63. At 32 drafting a RB you have to believe you are getting a NFL top 5 type of RB, I’m not sure that investment is worth it. But if you look at our other premium positions (WR, DB, DL) there could be no one of “value” at 32. WR and DL are deep positions where very good players will be available in the 3rd round. If Barron is off the board there’s no safety option and CB is not a need at all that high. I could see a pick at RB, LB or TE as our pick. I know it’s against what we have done but a dynamic player at those positions could be the selection.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: