Quarterbacks make the receiving corps, not the other way around. Reggie Wayne, Pierre Garcon, Dallas Clark and that little white guy the Colts had last year were considered to be a "great" receiving corps last season, but this season they suck. And, if Ron Gronkowski was on the Jets, he'd be Dan Gronkowski.
Even if you somehow believe seeing something in person is vastly superior than something on TV (it isn't, especially if you are high up), this doesn't give you the credentials for being able to analyze a QB. The production crew gives you all the replays you need for you to make an informed decision. I can see Sanchez's head turn, staring down receivers, or if he throws into double coverage, or anything of that nature just as well as you can, if not better since I can see it more than once (football stadiums tend to give you generic replays, and some barely at all; redskins stadium for instance). Only thing you can't see if the receivers who run particular routes live (but again this can be seen on replay). Even at a game though, you're gonna tell me you can watch Sanchez fully throughout the play, and all the receivers running their respective routes to see if they are open? If you can then good for your eyes that you can do all that multi tasking. "but either way proves your point about TV, wrong." How exactly? Because you said so? If you want a gold star for this achievement be my guest, but what you're saying just isn't correct, sorry. Lets get back to arguing about substantive stuff that actually matters (like Sanchez) and not whether going to a football game qualifies you to be an expert on QB play.
His 79 catch 1250 yard 2009 season where he was superbowl MVP? The point is it's hard to tell how much of a receiver's production is from the receiver, how much from the system, and how much from the QB. Welker wasn't one of the best receivers in the league until he got in NE. Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark turned from pro bowlers to average Joes after Manning got hurt. Are Graham and Gronk and Welker and Colston productive because they're great or are they productive because they're good and playing in great systems with great QBs?
Heh! The Sanchez Fans think everyone else sucks, but not Sanchez. Hey, Holmes is not perfect, but he's a quality wideout.
Strawman arguments? Do you watch the games bro? At all? If anything, you are doing the same against my points. You are pointing to stats. Stats do not tell the whole story, unless you are playing fantasy football. What the HELL do I care about the Jets 3rd down % when the opposing team very often makes a big 3rd and 7 or more? Does forcing a team to go 3 and out in the first quarter matter at all when you're going to eventually give up a big 3rd and 12 when it counts? Let's look at the schedule and talk about QBs: Jets wins: Dallas, Jacksonville, Miami, San Diego, Buffalo (2x), Washington, KC. Jets losses: New England (2x), Baltimore, Philly, GIants, Denver, Oakland Dallas had the Jets on the ropes and gave them the game. San Diego is the only legitimate win against what can be considered a good QB, and they found themselves in a big hole in that game. The rest of them have come against journeymen like Fitzpatrick, (how's he done his whole life with the exception of a few games last year and early this year?) and Grossman, or against backup QBs (all the rest). They even lost games to bad QBs (Tebow, Campbell). They haven't been able to overcome a good offense for most of the season. The teams with truly good offenses/QBs have slapped them around (New England, Philly) and the Giants game was the one game where the defense played reasonably well from a STATISTICAL standpoint, but again, stats mean shit if you don't get the job done. They can't tackle, and if Eli doesn't go after REvis the entire game, inexplicably, we may have a different story as well. C'mon man, don't point to Buffalo as making a key stop!!!!! The friggin receiver dropped a wide open pass after the team marched all the way down the field with a minute left in the game!!!!! Logic dictates that you will make some stops and not others, but if not for that drop by Johnson, that is likely a loss. A good defense doesn't allow the Bills to march down the field like that.....or Tebow to go 95 yards........... Flacco may be the one example that you have a point, but the jury is out there too since he's been mostly abysmal this year as well. That game was a disgusting display of putrid offense. I give credit for the good when it's due, but when you're gonna come to me and point only to statistics, I can't take it seriously. The Patriots defense is ranked at the bottom of the league, yet they're 12-3 with the same schedule as the Jets.
Not to mention that a good defense would have stopped Tebow's drive before it started - Leonhard missed that tackle of McGahee on the goal line on the swing pass that started the drive.
I'm gonna stop arguinig with you after this post because you're clearly incompetent and I rather not waste my time. You can honestly sit there with a straight face and say you don't care about stats (that point to the Jets being the 2nd best team on D on 3rd downs) and tell me that the Jets SO OFTEN give up a 1st down on a 3rd and 7 play. HOW?!?!?! I'm absolutely baffled by this. I know I'm not arguing with a HS kid either since you go to every Jet game which makes this even more unfathomable to me. I also fail to see how opponent 3rd down % resembles anything close to a fantasy football stat, but OK. Fitzpatrick isn't a journeyman QB. He's started 10+ games the last 4 seasons. I'm not gonna argue the talent of QBs we beat, cause it isn't great, but you specifically wrote that we haven't beat ANY qb (implying at least 1) that wasn't a journeyman, and I pointed out at least 5; so you're wrong in that regard. Look at the whole picture. The defense was lights out against Denver the entire game save the last drive. Did the TD suck and make me want to punch a kid? Absolutely. The D still played a heck of the game for the most part. You can say they broke when it mattered most, sure, but that doesn't take away the ENTIRE game. A game is 60 minutes. Every minute counts in terms of play. Well stats show, that the Pats are 12-3 cause of their offense, not their defense. I'm sure PatsFanTX would agree with me on that. Their defense is last in the league for a reason. Let me ask you something, how many games has NE's D won in their wins? If its not as bad as you say it is (which stats point out), then show me where they've single handedly won games for them, where the offense wasn't primarily responsible? Btw, I won't respond to your post, because I promise you the answer won't be a significant number. Maybe one of the other posters will argue for me, because I'm not gonna waste my time with people who can honestly sit there and rather use subjective viewpoints over statistics. I can see using both collaboratively, but you won't give ANY type of credence to statistical analysis, which only proves you to be irrational.
Quarterbacks are not the reason why receivers are able to beat their man. It's up to the QB to get them the ball, but when it comes down to it, the receivers are out there running routes and they need to be able to get open. T.O. made Garcia, Moss made Culpepper. Going further, Larry Fitzgerald is still producing with Kolb and Skelton. Steve Smith still produced with Delhomme. Manning can make any receiver look good(you're talking about arguably the greatest here), but if you watched the Colts, you'd know that Reggie Wayne is one of the top receivers in this league, and is outproducing our #1 guy with Kerry Collins, Curtis Painter and Dan Orlovsky. Gronkowski gets open. Watch the guy play, he'd be a beast on any team. You are taking too much credit away from him because he plays with Tom Brady. Many Tight Ends have played with Brady, but only one of them has gone for 1200 yards, caught 15 TDs and 82 passes. If Gronkowski was on this team, he'd still be one of the best Tight Ends in the game. His numbers would definitely drop off, but he's putting up insane numbers anyway for a TE. The point I'm trying to make is that NO good to great QB in this league doesn't have a quality receiving corps. It's irrational to expect Sanchez to go against all odds and start producing with what we have right now, which is NOT a quality receiving corps. I'd sing a different tune if we had a good corps, I mean at least someone who could pass for a #1 receiver. Look at what we have right now. It's a complete joke, and even more so if you expect Sanchez to light the world on fire with this average group of guys. I'm going to start calling our corps TAG, for The Average Group.
Let's just get off this point altogether. You're pointing to stats for everything we talk about, I'm pointing to subjective opinions based on what I see, so we're both guilty of strawman arguments in that scenario. Have a great day.
My point exactly. He was Pittsburgh's #2 receiver, not their #1. He's not getting those numbers if Hines Ward isn't on the other side battling it out with the opposing team's #1 corner. Where was this production his other 5 years? He has only gone over 1000 yards ONCE in his 6 year career, and he wasn't even the #1 receiver on the team. Look at the guy play, he's not getting open, not getting separation, not catching the easy passes, not a #1 receiver. I'm completely fine with Holmes as our #2, IF we had a true #1. We don't have a #1 guy, and Holmes in that role is below average.
He was without a doubt Pittsburgh's X, their downfield threat, their number one guy, the guy who drew double coverage. Ward was primarily a slot guy. You've got the 2009 Steelers backwards. EDIT: Holmes has clearly not been as productive this year as he was in 2009 or 2010. Is that him? The QB? The OC? I can't tell, but I'm damn sure he played like a number one in both 2009 and in 2010-and that's what Tanny saw when he gave him a 5/50 million contract.
Of course the Pats are 12-3 because of their offense, only a moron or a blind Pats homer would argue differently. But using total yardage as the sole criteria to say the Pats have the worst defense is just as crazy. Sure, the Pats and Packers are the 31st and 32nd ranked defense based on yardage, and that is because both teams have had huge 2nd half leads forcing other teams to continue to throw. Also not saying the Pats defense was soley responsible for a win this year, but they are ranked 14th in points allowed, 3rd in turnovers with 30, and 3rd with a +14 give away/take away ratio.
