Ezekiel Elliott, not Rashad Jennings, best option at RB for New York Giants

With the No. 10 pick in the 2016 NFL Draft, the New York Giants will have a lot of prospects to choose from. However, Ezekiel Elliott remains the best option for the G-Men.

The day after Christmas I wrote an article explaining in detail why the New York Giants need Ohio State’s Ezekiel Elliott.

I cited Elliott’s versatility, the fact that he’s an every-down back and the fact that New York hasn’t a back like that since Tiki Barber retired as reasons why drafting the former Buckeye would make sense.

More from New York Giants

• New York Giants deliberately disrespecting Saquon Barkley at this point
• 2023 NFL Season: Saquon Barkley signs silly deal with Giants
• New York Giants make big move with star RB disgruntled
• NFL: Which Giant deserved a contract extension – Barkley or Jones?
• 5 NFL teams that will definitely disappoint fans in 2023

He would fill a need, be ready to start from day one and would give the offense much-needed stability. He’s far and away the best running back in this draft class.

Since that late-December article was published, more outlets have been mocking Elliott to the Giants, and more people have been enraged by the projection. Some fans don’t seem to think the Giants have any use for the uber-talented former Ohio State Buckeye.

A big reason for the outrage is the uncanny support for Rashad Jennings.

Related Story: 30 greatest Giants of all-time

Jennings, who never emerged as anything more than a complement in Jacksonville and Oakland, played well down the stretch of last year, sure. He finished the season with four consecutive games with more than 70 yards rushing. On paper, Jennings looked like he earned more carries for 2016.

The stats aren’t as impressive when you consider Jennings’ big game — 81 yards — in Miami was against the league’s 28th ranked run defense, and his strong season finale — 170 yards — came against the Eagles, who ranked dead last in rush defense.

Add in the fact that 29 of his 74 yards against the Vikings came in the fourth quarter when Minnesota was already up 39-10, and you have slightly inflated statistics.

You know that committee approach that people hated? Seriously, people despised it.

Well, that committee style of running was probably the only thing that kept the often-injured Jennings healthy for 16 games. In fact, 2015 was the only time in his career that Jennings made it through an entire season. It’s not that the team didn’t know what to do with its running back group, it’s that the team knew running the committee approach would keep everyone healthy.

Ironically, the committee style was what kept Jennings healthy enough down the stretch to establish himself as the lead back and put up impressive late-season statistics.

In 2014 when the team gave Jennings the lion’s share of the carries, he was injured by week 6. If people get their wish and Jennings gets the brunt of the carries next year, history says the aging back will be injured, which means the Giants would have to rely solely on the triad of Williams, Vereen and Darkwa.

Also, Jennings isn’t exactly a young back. Jennings is going to be 31 by the end of March. An injury history and old age aren’t exactly ingredients for a top running back.

It just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense how some fans can expect Jennings to become a feature, reliable back at the age of 31. If he were that good, he would’ve established himself as one already. Jennings is a good complementary player, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable whatsoever with making him the lead back and giving him 18-20 touches per game.

It’s also worth remembering Jennings was never brought in to be the lead, every-down back. He was brought in to split carries with David Wilson, before Wilson unfortunately had to retire prematurely. So when people suggest Jennings should be the lead back, they’re essentially asking for him to be something the front office didn’t view him as when they signed the then-28-year-old back.

Outside of Jennings, the Giants have a niche back in Shane Vereen, a complementary piece in Orleans Darkwa and a lost cause in Andre Williams. It’s currently a carousel of mediocrity.

It’s baffling how people think the Giants can move forward with the black hole that’s been created at the running back position.

It seems the general consensus is that New York should take a pass rusher in the first round, but people seem to say that and assume the team won’t spend big on a defensive linemen in free agency. New York has an ample amount of cap space to work with, and there’s virtually no way they enter the draft as bare in the pass-rushing department as the team is now.

There’s a lot of guys available in free agency, and there are also a lot of guys whom the Giants could take later in the draft. If both DeForest Buckner and Joey Bosa are off the board, it wouldn’t shock me to see the Giants opt to take a pass rusher in the second round.

When I look at Elliott, I see a back who’s comparable to Todd Gurley in regard to longterm potential. I see a franchise back and a Pro Bowl runner.

I see a back who can carry an offense if necessary. I see a back with home-run speed, big play ability and a love for the game of football. He’s a complete back, which, like I stated earlier, the Giants haven’t had since all-time leading rusher Tiki Barber retired.

And while running backs may be a “dying breed” in the NFL, drafting Elliott at No. 10 wouldn’t be a reach at all.

Elliott is going to be a very good player in the NFL, and I don’t think there’s any way to dispute that. Analysts have connected with the dots with Elliott and the Giants, which is why Todd McShay, Daniel Jeremiah and others have mocked the best back in this rookie class to the Giants.

John Schmeelk of Giants.com, despite not actually mentioning Elliott’s name, discussed why drafting a running back in the first round would be worth it.

"“A difference maker is a difference maker, no matter what position they play. Go ask the Rams if they regret taking Todd Gurley in the first round, or the Vikings with Adrian Peterson. They do not. Running backs that can carry the load and play all three downs are rare these days, so if you can find one in the draft they can be worth a first round selection.”"

I think the key word from Shmeelk’s take is ‘rare.’ Elliott, is rare, Jennings is not. Even if you’re still part of the camp that believes Jennings can be the lead, 18-touches-a-game type of back in 2016, fine. But even if Jennings somehow stays healthy and plays well this year, he’ll be 32 next year. He’s playing on borrowed time, and he’s just a Band-Aid on the Giants’ running back woes.

Elliott, on the other hand, would solve a problem that started at the conclusion of the 2006 season. It’s true that the team has produced 1,000-yard rushers since Barber hung up the cleats, but the fact remains that neither Brandon Jacobs nor Ahmad Bradshaw were as complete a back as Elliott.

The Giants’ defense is in bad shape, but that will axiomatically be addressed in free agency. The running game isn’t anything to write home about, however. The cringe-worthy statistic is that if games had ended with 75 seconds left in regulation, the Giants would’ve made the playoffs.

Well, if the Giants had a back who could carry the load and move the chains throughout the course of the game, then games probably would’ve ended earlier. Saying that is obviously wishful thinking, but my point is that a true, lead back makes an offense so much better.

More nfl spin zone: New York Giants: Mohamed Sanu would be a great fit

The Giants offense, despite lacking versatility, has a lot of talent in place as it is. Adding Elliott to an offense already boasting Justin Pugh, Weston Richburg and Ereck Flowers up front would make the unit that much better.

Oh, and having an incredibly talented back to take some of the pressure off “The New Sensation” Odell Beckham Jr.’s shoulders would help a lot, too.

Free agency will come, and the Giants will be big spenders as they try to find a pass-rushing presence. But come draft night, Ezekiel Elliott is still the best option for the Giants at No. 10.