News Archives

Bill Parcells Selects Former New York Giants Captain George Martin as His Hall of Fame Presenter

February 5th, 2013 at 10:00 AM
By Dan Benton

When former New York Giants head coach Bill Parcells is officially inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio on August 3rd, it will be his former team captain, George Martin, who will act as his presenter.

"George was my captain along with Harry Carson and my player rep," Parcells said Monday.

Parcells acknowledged that the decision was a difficult one, naming off a series of other players he could have chosen, but he has always shared a close relationship with Martin. Accordingly, it seems only fitting that the former defensive lineman gets the call.

Shortly after the announcement was made on Saturday that Parcells had been voted in, he was asked by Steve Serby of the New York Post what his message would be for the Giants fans who hold him in such high regard after two Super Bowl championships. He answered the same way any true Giant would…

“Once a Giant, always a Giant, you know that," Parcells said.

The Pro Football Hall of Fame is a very deserving honor for a very deserving man. And George Martin was the right choice for a presenter.

Also…

Tags: Bill Parcells, Football, George Martin, Harry Carson, New York, New York Giants, NFL

No related posts.

15 Responses to “Bill Parcells Selects Former New York Giants Captain George Martin as His Hall of Fame Presenter”

  1.  fanfor55years says:

    re-post:

    Team-building is very hard in a salary-capped league. You MUST largely do it through the draft and you must have an outstanding quarterback. The problem is, if you have the latter you are nearly always picking relatively late in the draft, and that makes the building process even tougher because in most years by the time the draft reaches your fourth pick practically all the good players are gone. You’d better have a scouting group that is superb, which is also hard to retain when your personnel people, who know where all your great scouts are start to pick them off for their new teams.

    And even when you do everything right, soon enough comes the fifth year that your draftees are in the league and get to free agency, at which point you have to allow a number of your best young players whom you’ve developed to leave. It’s a constant stream of replenishing what you’ve got, knowing that it takes awhile for the young players you’ve brought in to get to the point where they can do what your lost players were doing in their third and fourth years in the league. It’s a constant stream of losses, gains, and plans that can be ruined via injury or some fool GM offering one of your prime “keepers” way too much money to be sustainable under your budget.

    Don’t kid yourself, Jerry Reese has a high-stress, difficult, job. It’s a great job, but like most great jobs it comes with lots of tough days and nights.

    One of the decisions any great GM has to make is where he will NOT spend his money so he can spend it where it fits the team philosophy and needs. I think it’s safe to say that by now we all know that the Giants under the John Mara/Jerry Reese/Tom Coughlin regime have decided they will not spend lots of dollars on linebackers or tight ends. I believe they will have also decided not to spend excessive amounts of dollars on slot receivers and defensive tackles. They also have clearly taken the approach that retaining older offensive linemen who have worked together for years can make up for a lesser degree of talent at those positions thanks to great position coaching and continuity.

    The Giants want to spend their money on a pass rush (largely defensive ends who are tremendously athletic), the quarterback, outside receivers, and the defensive backfield. All of that makes sense in today’s NFL. Lots of sense.

    But, every once in awhile comes a draft where they would have an opportunity to fill in areas of weakness that they don’t want to spend too much money on, and I think this 2013 draft may be that. The Giants need help on the offensive line, at cornerback, at defensive tackle, and at linebacker (they also need a strong-legged place-kicker). There is enormous depth in this draft at offensive line and defensive tackle, and enough potentially-elite corners that they can grab one early if they like. Reese will always speak the BPA game, and to some extent he follows that practice, but it would be EASY this April to weight his board toward crying needs and as a result pick up some quality players right where they need them. I’m excited at that prospect.

    •  LUZZ says:

      Excellent post!

      •  rlhjr says:

        Understood 55. I just hope Reese, Coughlin and Mara slightly readjust their priorities. Because they need to bring some size/speed athleticism to the neglected positions you mentioned in your post.

        That is my entire issue. Every few draft cycles, they should stock those positions with worthy talent.

        DT, SAM, MIKE and Corner are very much “need” positions of defense.
        On offense, ROT, Guard and Center need talent. Perhaps it’s already on the roster given last year’s picks. I really hope so. It’s just my opinion that time may be hard until those positions are properly addressed with talented players.

  2.  fanfor55years says:

    And good on Parcells for choosing a class act to be his presenter. I’ve always had mixed feelings about Bill, but this choice speaks volumes about him. George Martin is a top-shelf guy.

  3.  Nosh.0 says:

    I just want to try to sum up my 4 day long “Cruz is a #1” argument. And I will attempt to do it as briefly and as gentlemanly as possible. (Unfortunately I failed miserably on the brief part. You all can be the judge if I was a gentleman about it.)

    So here’s what I got from the “Nicks is much better than Cruz” camp
    -Nicks is a true X which is more important than any other wideout position.
    -Nicks forces defenses to account for him, ie doubles and safety help up top, allowing other WR’s to get less attention and making them better.
    - Nicks can take over a game. He also can catch the ball with guys all over him. As his hands are second to none. Think back shoulder fades, jump balls, plays like the TD catch with Charles Woodson holding him in the end zone. And of course his run after catch ability.
    (Agree on all these points. The guy is a stud. A true #1 when healthy.)

    Now for the Cruz complaints.
    -He doesn’t draw doubles and defensive attention like Nicks does, therefore not making other WR’s better.
    (This is my biggest problem with the Cruz debate. Because since last years post season it’s clear that defenses absolutely double him and game plan for him. Check out Nicks early TD against the Falcons when he was wide open over the middle. That was a direct result of the defense giving a ton of attention to Cruz. Also listen to Bellichicks sideline speech during last years SB. If Nicks gets credit for making Cruz better then Cruz deserves credit for making Nicks better.)

    -How then do you account for Cruz quiet second half, and the offense as a whole struggles in the second half?
    (Simple. At some point during the season defenses knew a few things. 1. that Nicks in his current state wasn’t a concern. 2. That Randle, Jernigan, Barden, and Hixon (fresh off 2 ACL’s) were not threats. Therefore defenses went into the game saying, don’t let Cruz beat us. Make one of the other guys beat us. Cruz had the best CB on him and was doubled throughout the year.)

    -O.K., but the offense never struggled like it did this season when we had a healthy Nicks playing in past seasons.
    ( Many reasons why the offense was so bad this season. A big one however is simply better talent at WR. Nicks rookie year coincided with Mannighams breakout, and while Mario is not elite, he’s a very good number 2. Something Cruz never had this season in Hixon, Randle, Barden and Jurnigan)

    -Cruz owes a large part of his success to Hakeem Nicks, and his ability to draw coverages away from other WR’s.
    (This is the other argument that bothers me. As if all Cruz’s success in 2011 occurred while Nicks was triple teamed by all pros and Cruz had practice squad corners against him. But if you absolutely must discount 2011, then look no further than 2012. 86 Catches, 1,092 yards and 10TD’s. Without a healthy Nicks or serviceable #2 for all or most of the season.)

    Arguments that will not be acknowledged.
    -I’m sure Cruz is a great fantasy player, and fun to use in Madden, but those don’t represent on field value.
    (No one on this site has EVER said they did. Oh wait, I forgot, I’m not acknowledging this.)

    So what makes a #1 WR?
    1. Can he take over a game?
    Yes Cruz can and has. Look no further then the NFC title game where he torched the niners top corner.
    2. Can he change the games momentum in a single play?
    Absolutely. This is what playmakers do, at any position. This is why I was always so pro Osi. Because even if he was quiet for 45 minutes, he could change the game in one play.
    3.Does he cause defenses to game plan and adjust for him?
    You have to keep a safety deep against him. And because he’s so quick in and out of cuts teams often use bracket coverage against him. Cruz was most def priority #1 for opposing defenses this season. If we learned anything those final 8 games it was this: (Hixon was not back, Barden is a waste of a roster spot, an injured Marty B wasn’t nearly as dynamic as we thought, Randle was not ready for that big of a role, and Nicks was hurt to the extent that he had no business being out there.)

    Cruz may not be that prototypical 6 foot plus X receiver we usually think of as a true #1. But with his big play ability, take over a game ability, and fear he puts in defenses, he most certainly fits the billing as a #1.

    Is he better than Nicks? I don’t know. Their skill sets are so different it’s tough to compare the two. But what I do know is that the list of WR’s that own the above mentioned 3 skills (Take over game, single play game changer, feared by defenses) is a short one. And those guys are not easily replaced.

    An ideal roster would not have two WR’s making big money. Better to allocate $$$ to other, more important positions. But you don’t get to choose what positions your best players play. You can certainly try to dictate it by investing high draft picks, bringing in high priced free agents, and giving certain guys more opportunities to develop at the positions which you place the most value on. But in the end, you don’t get to choose what players become your best. And it just so happens that 2 of the Giants top 5 players are WR’s. It doesn’t make any sense to let one of your best 5 guys leave in order to pay lesser players at more valuable positions. (Except for RB, as you can’t pay big $$$ to 2 guys)

    Verdict: Pay them both.

    I’ve made my case. Hopefully I haven’t ticked off too many people while doing it. I’m now bowing out of this debate once and for all.

    - Nosh.0. Out this mofo.

    •  fanfor55years says:

      Good points all. I still disagree with you, for many reasons that I won’t get into again and that have become boring. Let’s just see how this all plays out, knowing that EVERY one of us would like to have both Nicks and Cruz in blue for the next 5-8 years.

      At least we agree that Barden is/was a waste of a roster spot. I still cannot believe I got so much flak for saying so all along.

      •  rlhjr says:

        Nosh, one point that should be made is not only does Cruz complement Nicks.
        Nicks also complements Cruz. And (just for old time’s sake) Manningham complemented both of them.

        Talent assessments aside, no one can dominate alone. As a trio, Nicks, Cruz and Manningham were the best the Giants have had. IMHO they were the best the Giants ever had. And maybe ever will have again.
        I’ve always felt that way about them. And I do think that Randle will come around. (Fingers crossed)

        My point? Each member of the group brought value to the table. It could be argued that none of them individually is greater than what they brought as a group. I really hope Reese can keep Cruz and Nicks together.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      We disagree on Nicks vs Cruz but I won’t say that it’s crazy because you have some valid points.

      I think where we disagree is paying both of them. While it seems simple to say ok we might disagree on Cruz being as good as Nicks but everyone acknowledges that Cruz is one of our best players as is Nicks. We need to keep all the great players we can so keep both. This is where the NFL is much different than a sport like the NBA. because you don’t win with just a few great players. You need a whole lot of good players. Look at the ravens. I think having both Nicks and Cruz long term no doubt makes our passing game elite. But I think it can be close to that with one (especially Nicks) WR going forward for a much less cost which will allow other areas of our roster to be better. Those resources can be used to get more good players and sign moderate free agents that gives us the depth that win you SBs with.

  4.  GOAT56 says:

    Looking at the NFL over the last 5 years the teams that seem to mirror our approach roster wise are Pitt, Bal and GB. It’s not just because we all have won recently, it’s because how we design our rosters. All of us build through the draft while adding a key free agent here and there.

    In addition, we all let good starters go at times when it’s deemed their price is higher than their worth. Pitt looks like it will let Wallace walk, same with GB and Jennings. Pitt let Plax & Holmes go in previous years and GB let many WRs go the past decade. I don’t think we are that different so I think it’s unlikely we keep both Nicks and Cruz. While I agree with most that Nicks is clearly the choice, Cruz could be chosen because he’s probably cheaper and healthier. Even as strongly as many of us feel about Nicks JR will have a cut off number for Nicks too. I think JR is playing Cruz and Nicks against each other to get the best long term deal for one of them. I believe Nicks is the priority but much like what happen with Pitt and Brown when Wallace was believed to be the priority. We could face a similar situation. Pitt is not the type of team that will invest big money in 2 WRs and I don’t think we are either. The good thing is we are like Pitt last summer and still likely have at least one more year with both WRs. Regardless it seems like the best move to lock up one WR now and let the other play out his contract. There’s always the franchise tag if we extend Nicks but Cruz has a great season or vice versa.

    I think we have to work at adding more young talent to our defense in this draft. While JPP, Joseph and Prince look like building blocks our other star or paid like star defenders are pushing 30. This is assuming we don’t re-sign KP. While we have some potential in players like Brown, Hill, Hosley, Ojomo, Austin, Kuhn, Tracy, Williams, Paysinger and Herzlich they are all basically unproven except maybe Brown.

    At the same time we need to add talent to our OL while adding young talent at skill position in case we don’t re-sign Bennett, cut Bradshaw and/or Cruz/Nicks departs after 2013.

    •  Eric S says:

      Plax and Holmes are poor comparisons as both were let go for being headcases. You say GB has let go many WR’s over the last decade? Who? And were they on the level of a Cruz? Because Driver has been there for 13 years and Jennings for 7. James Jones (whom many around the league think can be a starter elsewhere has been there 6 years. Jordy Nelson( a 2nd rounder) has been there for 5 years.

  5.  TuckThis says:

    Evan is now discussing this exact topic on the FAN. His feeling ( in case anyone actually cares) is that Cruz is more valuable because Nicks has too many injury issues. Don’t shoot the messenger!

    I think the whole topic is mind numbing seeing no one can actually prove anything.
    I bet plenty of folks could also prove that Joe Flacco is better than Eli. Numbers are numbers and can be manipulated however you’d like them in many cases. And intangibles are just that….. intangible and unquantifiable.

    Aren’t we tired of this yet? ;-)

  6.  rlhjr says:

    If Osi or Tuck could be a tenth of what Martin was, the Giant D-line would be in good shape.

    In Martin you are talking about a MONEY pass rusher. The icing was as FF55 stated, “Class Act” individual.

    Not sure if they counted pressures and hurries in those days. But Martin supplied plenty of them and allowed LT to be even better. That was one hell of a defense and 75 was one of my fav Giants.

    I still remember his 80 yard TD interception off Elway in their meeting in the Meadow Lands. A thing of beauty it was. And it won the game.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: