I recently read a fantastic post about what Houston Texans' running back Ben Tate has gone through this season to continue playing despite four broken ribs. While the story itself does not relate directly to the New York Giants it got me thinking -- would the Giants be better served to try and keep Andre Brown as their featured back next season or to bring in Tate?
Both players are unrestricted free agents. Brown, who turns 27 on Sunday, has definitely lifted the Giants' running game since returning from his fractured leg. He has a team-leading 424 yards rushing (4.3 yards per carry) in five games. He averaged 5.3 yards per carry on 73 rushing attempts a season ago. Brown has suffered leg fractures two straight seasons.
Tate, 26 next season, is finishing his third season with the Texans -- most of that time spent backing up Arian Foster. With Foster on IR due to a back injury Tate is getting to showcase his skills as a featured back. He has 699 yards on 165 carries (4.24 yards per carry) and four touchdowns.
At 5-foot-11, 220 pounds, Tate is a power back who would fit the way the Giants like to run the ball.
My guess is that Tate would be more expensive to sign than Brown, as many teams figure to bid for his services.
Which player would you rather see with the Giants next season?