That's a pretty flimsy statement. Please tell us exactly which backup QB we should have traded away a #1 pick for.
I said this on Draft Day and was pissed when the jets traded up so, I'm glad I'm consistent. Why draft a guy with a mediocre arm who played minimal college games and never saw snow? UNFREAKINGBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As young players Brady and Brees and Montana all had similar arm strength to what Sanchez has now. Brady and Brees' arms got better (Montana, not so much) but you don't need an amazing arm to be a very, very good quarterback. Sanchez's arm is pretty close to Phil Rivers' arm as well.
A rookie? Let me guess, you're looking at Dalton and Newton right? I got news for you, the Jets aren't 2-14 and drafting in the top 10 where they can get such a rookie. Throwing in ANOTHER rookie will set the franchise back for years. If you want Sanchez replaced ,it needs to be with a journeyman veteran to keep the seat warm until something else develops. And even that is a bad idea. Like it or not, we're stuck with him for now unless a good veteran demands a trade.
obviously that would've been dependent on the other team being open to the trade, my point was, it seemed, to me, that the CS went with this guy just because they wanted to have a QB first round pick. So, they talked themselves into it. I doubt the patriots would've wanted to trade Cassel to a division rival, although he could've answered your question. Kevin Kolb was also traded since we picked up Sanchez, neither guy has obviously been to the conference title game, but of course, I stated way back when that the Jets got there in spite of having Sanchez at QB. When they needed him to do more than just manage a game, he failed both times.
Either would be a colossal mistake. The amount of players/draft picks it would take to accomplish either, or in Peyton's case maybe less players/picks but a salary cap murder, would set us back for years. Peyton wouldn't be able to win with a skeleton of a team, and Luck wouuldn't develop with no players and no draft picks to draft some.
One _really_ intersting thing about Sanchez is that they did not restructure his contract this off-season despite the fact that that was the easiest way to clear up cap space (at the expense of making him much harder to get rid of in 2012 or 2013). Instead he has decreasing cap numbers for the next two years and cutting him would save a lot of cap space. Tanny set it up so that Sanchez doesn't have to be the long term QB.
I highly doubt the Jets are getting Manning. They need to have a full draft and re-stock the shelf. They can't afford a trade of pucks. What players would the Colts take? Revis? Harris? Forget it Jets are going with Sanchez this year, like it or not. There are a lot of ways to cover up his faults. Someone previously mentioned why run and throw short. That gives D the opportunity to prepare for two plays with one basic defensive set. Another example: Plax was inadequately utilized. It burns me that when he was really needed, ( SD 3 TDs, Buf 1st down) they knew what plays to call and Sanchez "somehow" made a great play to get him the ball. Bottom line...New OC is required
would vote for gone -- problem is who is going to take his place. Think that we need to take a QB in the draft as this way he can be: groomed and take the main role if Sanchez continues to suck; be the fallback if Sanchez gets hurt. Look at the Colts for a team that does not have a backup plan
Oh I agree there. Eli and Coughlin were both about to be "fired" in 2007 before they caught fire in the playoffs. Even then I don't think Manning has really reached his potential until this year. Even last year he was woefully inconsistant even if his "numbers" were good. I do see what your saying with Sanchez. It's hard to predict whether this is a big bump in the road or a sign of continued decline. I think it's clear that he's regressed from previous years though and I think there are other QBS in the league with the same level of experience that are doing better.
I've said this before, and I wish there was someone who could either deny or confirm it. I don't think the Colts have the ability to trade Peyton prior to the next league year by rule. If that is in fact the case, it means they cannot avoid the $28 million roster bonus he's due without cutting him. For a number of reasons I don't believe Peyton and Luck will be able to co-exist on the same team, and it's not just because of money. If that scenario unfolds, Peyton will likely prioritize winning over money as he's already got more money than anyone could ever need. I could see the Jets picking him up for a reasonable contract that allows them to also keep Sanchez and let him learn behind the best for a couple of years. I am NOT saying I expect that to happen or that it's even likely to happen, just that it's not necessarily the case that the Jets would have to give up a lot to get Peyton.
You have to give him at least one more year When some people defend sanchez saying he has no time to throw, there is always someone else saying this is an excuse Sanchez is the third most sacked qb in the league (37 times) and, as we all know, he is always under pressure in the pocket. Sure, Ben roethlisberger has been sacked just as much (38), but he does leaves the pocket all the time EDIT: also McElroy sucks
Schefter and Mort have both reported this. Manning doesn't get traded--he either gets cut by Indy and becomes a free agent or he's on Indy in 2012 because once they pick up the option he's impossible to trade without blowing up their cap.
I am not aware of your point about cutting vs. a trade, but it sounds plausible. If he can only be signed as a FA, then I would hate to see the Jets get involved in an Ashoguma-type circus, to the exclusion of going after other. arguably more helpful players
For all the Sanchez defending I do on this forum, this is the same camp I'm in. Although I think he can do better than the olive garden.
You've got to be crazy optimistic to think that Manning comes to the Jets on the cheap, with Slauson and Hunter and an aging Moore on the offensive line and a mediocre receiving crew.
Agreed. We are stuck with Sanchez because we have too much invested in the position. Schotty is expendable, his firing doesn't affect our cap, and his replacement doesn't require a draft pick, trade, or a salary cap hit. Some will say that's unfair, but he is the guy responsible for the offense and our offense is simply not good enough. We need to see what Sanchez can do in a different system to fully evaluate his skills. If he does not develop under a new OC, then the team can look at other options, but right now, we don't know with 100% certainty that Sanchez is at the core of our offensive problems and the risk of giving up on him is too high (cap, draft picks, trade up, trade etc.). In fact, his numbers demonstrate yearly improvement and his work ethic indicates a desire to get better. Finally, what if we traded or released Sanchez for a bag of peanuts and he flourished under a different OC for a different team like Brees? That would really suck, but it would be typical for a team and fan base that lacks the patience necessary to develop younger players.
The Jets can and need to upgrade the RT position regardless of what happens. Slauson and Moore are fine. How did the Colts WR's look without Peyton this year? Peyton makes the entire offense AND defense better. He doesn't take sacks because he has a really good idea what the defense is doing prenap, makes the correct adjustments, makes quick decisive reads and has a quick release. The Jets defense regularly playing with a lead would be ridiculously good, and Peyton knows that. It's not about being crazy optimistic, just pointing out a potential scenario. I don't think it happens, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
just take a look at what Jim Harbaugh's brilliant offensive mind did for Alex Smith and you have a clear view of what a smart offensive coordinator replacing the Dolt we have suffered with for five season can do for the far more talented Mark Sanchez
