News Archives

Victor Cruz Has “Gut Feeling” Hakeem Nicks Will Return to New York Giants

December 28th, 2013 at 8:00 AM
By Dan Benton

When wide receiver Victor Cruz entered free agency only a season ago, it was his teammate, Hakeem Nicks, who had a gut feeling he'd return to the New York Giants. That feeling later proved to be 100% accurate as Cruz went on to sign a five-year, $43 million deal.

Now, with the shoe on the other foot, it's Cruz who has a gut feeling, telling reporters on Friday that he believes Nicks will return to Big Blue in 2014.

"I do have a gut feeling that he’s coming back. I don’t know if that gut feeling is true, but I do have a gut feeling and it’s more so just me being selfish," Cruz said on Friday. "That’s just what I want to see. I want to see him back here with us. I want to see him being his same old self, his same old calm, resolved self and hopefully that can happen, but if not, I wish him the absolute best and he knows that."

There may be something to Cruz's gut feeling, as Nicks spoke openly about wanting to return to the Giants for the first time all season on Friday. He went as far as to say he'd be meeting with the team next week and may even offer them a "hometown discount" assuming, of course, there remains an organizational stability.

"Like I always say, we know that I want to be here. I understand the business side of things. I’m sure we’re going to talk," Nicks said. "They know that I want to stay. It’s just a matter of how things are going to work out. We’ll know that soon."

With only one game remaining, it seems a bit odd that the waves of change have calmed so suddenly. Throughout the duration of the season it seemed like a foregone conclusion that Nicks would not be returning to the team, but his statements on Friday would seem to indicate he's going to stick it out right where he is. And perhaps that has something to do with his lack of production this season, or perhaps everyone just had it wrong from the start.

Whatever the case may be, Cruz obviously wants his teammate to return and, if you take him at his word, Nicks still wants to be here. We'll see if all of that remains true come Monday.

Photo credit: Mike L Photo's / / CC BY-NC-SA


You're not an average fan, so why wear an average shirt to represent your team? LogoWear brings some originality to the game and will help you be the star of your team's following - not the third guy in off the bench. Your team isn't just another team. Don't be caught wearing just another shirt. Make a statement with LogoWear!

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

Tags: Football, Hakeem Nicks, New York, New York Giants, NFL, Victor Cruz

Related posts

27 Responses to “Victor Cruz Has “Gut Feeling” Hakeem Nicks Will Return to New York Giants”

  1.  Krow says:

    I hope he’s right, but it’s hard to construct a scenario that makes this a reality. Hakeem has not played to his 2011 Superbowl level for two years now. While the reasons are unknown the results are clearly evident. And the Giants are not in a great cap position having pi$$ed away much of it on busts and nepotism. All it’s going to take is one team desperate enough to gamble on Nicks making a miraculous comeback and we’ll see an offer that won’t be matched. Hate to see him go … but in the end he has to take the money … it may very well be his last shot.

    •  James Stoll says:

      Ironically, Hakeem has played every bit as well as Eli. Therefore, Eli should offer to give back $4-$5M/year to keep him

  2.  James Stoll says:

    As we finish up the dark 2013 campaign and head into an off-season of expected status quo ante, Jerry Reese’s pre-season comment that “everyone was o notice of the unacceptable 2012 performance” looks like a supreme (some might say super) joke.
    2012 was a failure; another late season collapse punctuated by back-to-back blowout losses when the Giants controlled their own destiny
    That was the benchmark against which this season was to be measured; on which everyone was on notice
    And the came 2013 and a roster that was coached to and performed at a level so grotesquely awful, that the fans were wistful for an opportunity to witness a late season collapse
    And yet by all indications nothing will change
    Reese will remain the GM
    Coughlin the head coach; the genius, his offensive henchman
    Snee will stay the left tackle; Baas the center; Diehl the jack of all trades, master of none (wow, was that adage ever written for a guy!)
    So what exactly did it mean to “be on notice”?
    Apparently this: take notice, your jobs are secure, enjoy your day, ticket sales are in the bank

  3.  Chad Eldred says:

    In most of the discussion of Nicks the foundation of the conversation assumes that it is desirable for the Giants to have Nicks return. If he cannot play better than he did this year I don’t care if he plays for free. If you do not have a number one that can command double coverage or coverages being rolled towards him, then you do not have a number one receiver.

    •  James Stoll says:

      The curse of the once great player
      The giants currently have 4: Nicks, Eli, JPP and Tuck
      Tuck proved, after 2 down years, that it is possible to come back
      The other 3 have now given us 2 down years
      If they can resurrect themselves Tuck-like next season, the team is instantly better
      If not, …….

      •  Chad Eldred says:

        Tuck proved that he could play well in a contract year. I like Tuck, but I’m inclined to believe that if we would be paying him for what he HAS done, not what he WILL do. Nicks knew he was in a contract year and still didn’t produce. Granted the offense was a mess, but Nicks was as much a cause of the train wreck as he was a victim of it. JPP was injured for, in practical terms, both seasons and is still in the early portion of his career. I have a lot of optimism that he will return strong in ’14. Eli is a QB and they are a whole different creature altogether.

        Nicks is wise not to torch his bridges. This is another tight cap year and the open market may not be as kind to him as he would hope.

        •  James Stoll says:

          Still, if these 4 guys are not their good versions in 2014, or replaced by someone equal to their good versions, look for another 3, 4, 5, 6 win season.

  4. Dan BentonDan Benton says:

    Going back to the previous topic: Antrel Rolle had a $100K Pro Bowl escalator in his contract. So his snub cost him some big money.

    •  Krow says:

      While not exactly fair … the fortunes of your team directly influence your Pro Bowl chances.

    •  turkish says:

      He’s just not a Pro Bowler this year. PFF also excluded him from their Pro Bowl roster. Will Hill was more deserving according to PFF, but he was not on the ballot.

      • Dan BentonDan Benton says:

        Remember when I used to cite PFF and people told me it was a joke of a site and subjective? Now it’s a standard.

        Regardless of what PFF proclaims, Rolle was deserving of the Pro Bowl this season. If Will Hill hadn’t been suspended, he was deserving as well. And so was Tuck.

        •  turkish says:

          I just dont see how you pick Rolle or Tuck over the players picked. Sorry.

          PFF is PURE stats. So I don’t see how anyone can say it’s a “joke” or “subjective”.

          • Dan BentonDan Benton says:

            I’m not crapping on PFF. I like PFF and use their lines/stats often. But I’m hardly alone in the Rolle support. Coughlin, Tuck, Barber, Keith Bulluck, various reporters and other current/former players all agree with me. I feel as if I am in pretty good and knowledgeable company here.

          •  Krow says:

            You’re completely wrong if you think that. Just because they assign numbers to something doesn’t make it valid.

        •  Krow says:

          The earth was considered flat for centuries too. That didn’t make it any less a joke … or any less subjective. Can 40,000,000 Frenchmen be wrong? Ummmm yes.

          •  turkish says:

            Is this an attempted argument against PFFs grading system? If so, you should really check out the site and analysis. It is more in depth than any other site and really focuses on the individuals performances as opposed to name or “homer” point of view.

            •  Krow says:

              I did. In many cases they have people who make decisions such as whether an OG executes his assignment or not. I’m NOT saying they’re homers or biased or anything of the sort. But if someone is making a judgement then it’s subjective by definition. It doesn’t matter if people decide to take it as fact … it doesn’t matter if they attach pseudo-statistics to their decisions. It’s still subjective.

              Also … there’s no proven validity to the measures they do take. There’s no scientific rigor in what they do. No scientific method. No regression analysis of past results. No peer checking.

              There’s nothing wrong with the site … and it’s fun to read and discuss. Where they go off the rails is when they try to portray their work as something it isn’t.

  5.  turkish says:

    Pete Damilatis ?@PFF_Pete 30m
    Sadly, my lasting 2013 memory of Antrel Rolle will be the Cowboys burning him for 4 first downs on their game-winning drive.

  6.  turkish says:

    “I like PFF and use their lines/stats often. But I’m hardly alone in the Rolle support. Coughlin, Tuck, Barber, Keith Bulluck,”

    All with HEAVY Giants bias. Sorry. The evidence against him is greater. STUNK for the 1st 6 weeks. Targeted in the Dallas game in coverage…No Pro Bowl.

    I LIKE Rolle a lot, but I’m not going to call him one of the best in the game when he clearly isn’t.

    • Dan BentonDan Benton says:

      Can’t fault him for the Dallas snafu. Guy was moved out of position due to injuries to the team. He should be rated solely as a safety, not as a cornerback.

      •  turkish says:

        His coverage skills were exposed so he isn’t responsible? Come on Dan, the guy didn’t have a complete enough season to make the Pro Bowl roster over the players that did make it.

        • Dan BentonDan Benton says:

          That’s not the debate here. You’re arguing about a coverage rating when he was playing CB, when I’m saying he wasn’t looking to go to the Pro Bowl as a cornerback, but a safety.

          That’d be like saying “Peyton Manning was a great QB, but his running rating was so negative, he doesn’t deserve to go to the Pro Bowl.”

          •  turkish says:

            But running QBs have gone to the Pro Bowl as QB for their running abilities even when their passing stats/rating weren’t great.

      •  turkish says:

        If Tuck is only rated on his DE performance, his numbers when lined up at DT would have to be ignored then, right? That would easily keep him off the Pro Bowl roster.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: