Roster analysis: Is kicking job really open?

by Ed Valentine on Jul 10, 2007 7:27 AM EDT in New York Giants News

When the Giants traded with Kansas City for Lawrence Tynes a few weeks ago, General Manager Jerry Reese insisted Tynes would not be handed the placekicking job.

He insisted that Tynes would have to earn it.

Reese said this to Giants.com after acquiring Tynes.

"We wanted a guy to come in here and put pressure on (Huston), who we really like a lot. Huston has a really strong leg. But we feel better about having a guy that's kicked in the league to come in and compete for the job, because we were basically handing it to (Huston) without a lot of competition. We want to put pressure on him to earn the job. And we want (Tynes) to earn the job as well. One of our goals is to have competition at every position."

Does rookie Josh Huston really have a chance to beat out Tynes? Let's continue our occasional roster analysis by taking a look.

• In the blue corner. Lawrence Tynes. Entering his fourth season, Tynes made 78.2 percent of his field goals in three seasons with Kansas City. He is 6-for-11 from beyond 50 yards in his career. His one reported weakness is that he does not possess a strong leg on kickoffs.

• In the red corner. Josh Huston. Reese has consistently praised Huston, saying how much he likes the rookie from Ohio State. Huston was cut at the end of training camp last season by the Bears. He reportedly has a strong leg and is excellent on kickoffs.

MY VIEW: Some have wondered if the Giants would keep both (Tynes for field goals and extra points, Huston for kickoffs). I can't see that happening, since it seems like a wasted roster spot.

PREDICTION: Huston will wind up kicking somewhere in the league this season, but I highly doubt it will be the Giants. Reese would not have traded for Tynes unless the intent was to give him the job. Unless Huston is miles better in training camp, this job belongs to Tynes.

Tweet Comment 3 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Kicking Job

I disagree with your evaluation and here is why. Tynes has one and only one thing in his favor, 4 years experience. That is it. He was in the lower 1/3 in both his kickoffs and his FG percentage. What is so special? Not much!

Huston does have a very strong leg, he was 88% in his year of kicking at OSU, AND he is $500k less expensive! Then we have to give up either a 6th or 7th round draft pick.

Plus, Tynes is in his last contract year. In 2008, Tynes will demand what we didn't pay Feely. So, why would we put ourselves in the same situation next year. I don't think so. Reese likes Huston for a reason.

I predict that either Huston will win the job in the preseason or, we keep both kickers for the year. Let Huston kickoff and get that 1 yars experience and then next year turn the reigns over to him and then probably save approximately $1million and end up with a better kicker.

Time will tell.

by bigbluegiant on Jul 10, 2007 9:16 PM EDT reply actions

Kickoffs are important

I think it is vital we have the ability to make high deep kickoffs that pin the opponents' offense deep in their own territory. The offense would be limited in their play calling and our defense could be more aggressive.

The momentum shift from great kickoffs is so important in my opinion that it might be worth having a roster position for it or at the least we should make sure our kicker can do both aspects of the kicking game.

by giant fan since 57 on Jul 11, 2007 6:14 AM EDT reply actions

I agree

I got tired of watching teams return kickoffs to the 35 against the Giants last year. It got to the point where I was just glad the Giants didn't give up TDs on the returns. If Huston is clearly better, give him the job. If not, I doubt the Giants will keep both guys active.

by Ed Valentine on Jul 11, 2007 7:18 AM EDT up reply actions