Sooo how did a thread talking about the start of 2011 season if Luck was drafted become about Sanchez being traded for a 1st rounder "right now"? The whole premise of the thread was if we got Orton in 2011 and traded Sanchez away then, not now.
Someone made a comment saying that there are 16 teams that would trade away a first rounder for Sanchez, right now, if given the opportunity. Some posters, myself obviously being one of them, did not agree with that statement.
Ahh, the argument was confusing me since it seemed like one side is arguing about his value now while another is arguing about his value at the start of 2011 with regards to the 1st round pick. I personally think his upside would have warranted it for a number of teams at the start of last season, but for the start this season a lot of teams would have backed off at that cost. I'm hoping it spikes above a 1st rounder this season, but that's my optimism that he can develop into a top half starter this season and keep the team competitive.
I don't give two turds what you think of my cred here. I think it is very high. Orton was injured in 2010, and it seemed to carry into last year. Before he wa injured he was a top fifteen Qb. I notice the Chiefs won two of his three starts after sucking most of the year. Obviously he is backing up Romo now, and not starting. I don't really know why he ended up there rather than someplace else. Never said otherwise. That covers it.
That last statement is a lie pure and simple. The only starting job Orton lost was in Denver, in large measure due to Tebowmania. He never lost a starting job anywhere else.
He couldn't beat out Rex Grossman in Chicago then they traded him to get underachieving Jay Cutler. In Denver he lost his job to Tim Tebow.
I see the argument went from WOULD HAVE to ARE. I Didn't realize we had to split hairs over hypothetical arguments. The OP was referencing Luck to 2011 and my post was in the spirit of the thread title. I also thought the list of 2011 NFL QB starters would have given it away that i was indicating the 2011 season. I guess my lack of understanding English tenses spoiled your attempt to belittle my post. Seeing that you are such a perfectionist, let me clarify for you. 16+ teams would have traded a 1st (or more) for Sanchez during the 2011 season. If Oakland was willing to hand over a 1st & 2nd for a washed up Palmer on his last legs, they would have easily handed over 2 firsts for Sanchez. Another 15 teams would have traded away a 1st rounder for Mark also. Just so your perfectionist arguments aren't accidentally swayed by my lack of proper English tenses again, I'll revamp my original post for 2012. There should be 5 ~ 10 teams that would STILL trade way a 1st for Mark before the start of the season. There may be more pending the outcome of the mid season mark.
I didn't belittle your post, I was justifying my own response to another poster who obviously couldn't comprehend where it was coming from without me laying it out step-by-step. You used a Wikipedia list of starting QBs in 2011, while ignoring the fact that many of those QBs were backups to much, much better QBs like Cutler, Bradford, and Manning. Those teams would not have traded for Sanchez, even in the context of your argument. The fact that you had to resort to such measures to justify your own earlier statement makes it quite unnecessary for me to belittle you via spelling and grammar.
Given how untested Weeden, Tannehill, Luck, and RGIII are at this point, it would be fair to use the starting QBs from the 2011 season, not for the upcoming season. Everyone is talking about how Sanchez "regressed" last season - we should be using last season to indicate wherever a team would trade a first for Sanchez I did not see however, the RIGHT NOW aspect of this conversation. If were using last season as the test, then you can absolutely see 16 teams trading a #1 (and just a #1 for the sake of this debate) for Sanchez. This off-season maybe not so much - this is because we haven't seen those players perform at the NFL level. This season we have 2 potential big time players at the QB position and 2 others that can start on opening day -
So the argument is that sometime in the middle of the 2011 season, 16 teams would have traded a first round pick for Sanchez? I am asking this because the video in the OP seems to have the Jets trading for Orton sometime during the course of the 2011 season. If that is the argument: *The Bears still had Jay Cutler (and still do), the fact that he was injured doesn't change anything *The Colts still had Peyton Manning. *The Chiefs still had Matt Cassel. He had a pro-bowl season and also had a 27:7 TD:INT ratio in 2010. * The Rams still had Bradford (Offensive Rookie of Year 2010) *Dalton was far exceeding expectations *Same with Ponder *Same with Alex Smith *The Raiders looked pretty dangerous while Campbell was still healthy, and frankly they embarrassed Sanchez and the Jets. Or is it the beginning of 2011? Some of the above still apply, plus the following: *Freeman is still a hot prospect coming off of a season with a 25:6 TD:INT ratio. They barely missed the playoffs in 2010, and Freeman was a pro-bowl alternate. *Kolb was expected by many people to be a very good starter. Or the end of 2011? Again, some of the above apply plus the following: *The Colts only ditched Manning because of the opportunity to get Luck. Sanchez was never an attractive option for them. *Redskins know they have RGIII. You are delusional if you think they would rather have Sanchez. Will that pan out in their favor? I don't know, but that doesn't change anything. *Dalton and Ponder are still looking like the kind of prospect that you want to develop and hold on to, not sacrifice a 1st rounder and upgrade to a middle-tier 3rd/4th year QB. *Alex Smith let a strong defensive team to the playoffs, and outplayed one of the Elite QBs in the NFL in a playoff victory. He narrowly missed making the Conference Championship game, mostly because of his teammates' mistakes... sound familiar? Why would you spend your top pick to get another QB who boasts the same achievements? Sanchez has more upside than Smith, because of age/experience, but he is not worth an extra first rounder for a team that has a perfect system for Smith to succeed in. *Everyone reported Miami being VERY VERY high on Ryan Tannehill. Would they take Sanchez instead? It seems unlikely considering that fact, and the fact that they consistently give him trouble in head-to-head matchups with little talent in their favor. No matter which context you choose, your argument falls apart. No, I absolutely can not.
16 teams from the 2011 season? Like I said I didn't disagree with you on that, 16 teams is a lot of teams, I could easily pick 10 Dolphins Browns Raiders - Our defense had absolutely no speed on the field - it was the reason our team regressed so much, and we lost that game because Cromartie fumbled the football on a kickoff right after the Raiders scored, and we couldn't tackle McFadden on a 60 yard TD. On offense we played well enough to win the game, defense and special teams we were too slow and turnover prone. Again I say get your facts straight. Chiefs - Say what you will but they would of traded a #1 for Sanchez straight up. Matt Cassel isn't very impressive Bills Redskins Jaguars Cardinals Seahawks Broncos This would make Sanchez a top 20 QB in the league, and he's on the cusp of surpassing some of his peers if he comes out all blazing and ready to prove doubters wrong. He's got a lot of value in the NFL, and a lot of teams would be interested if that were to happen. We have seen Eli go from a top 15 QB to pretty much a top 5 QB in a matter of 2 seasons. People's ideas change extremely fast in the NFL Like I said I never agreed that 16 teams would trade for him, but a ton of teams absolutely would, and if QBs don't pan out this season you would see even a larger surplus of teams wanting a QB. Next off-season the only good FA for QBs I believe is Schaub. Sanchez wouldn't command TOP dollar but he would gather interest for A LOT of teams. So yeah, some of this stuff you talk is bullshit. I wasn't coming at you for the 16 teams, I was calling you out because I questioned your reasoning and knowledge of how NFL Front Offices work.
Sixteen teams? Seriously? Maybe they'd bounce the idea around internally or inquire what the price would be, but believe me, if the Jets stood firm for a 1st, that number would drop significantly. How many teams were involved when Cutler was on the block? 2-3?
A first would be worth it for a young QB, that can play well in the playoffs, and have high upside given the right system. Br4dw4y5ux mentioned Rich Gannon I would agree. I always thought Sanchez's path in the NFL would be similar to Troy Aikman, good QB when it mattered, but had a great team around him. That was my vision of the Jets back when we drafted him.
I think that from the outside looking in, you might be able to pick 6-8 teams that potentially would have interest in trading a high pick for Sanchez. Within those organizations, there are sure to be some coaches & GMs that think highly of him, and others that don't. That is why I said that the Jets would optimistically have 4 teams interested in making the trade. Sure there are a number of teams that you could make an argument would benefit from that trade. I will even give you credit for 10 teams, though I think the real number is slightly lower. But the number of teams who would actually pull the trigger on that offer is guaranteed to be much lower.
It's a stupid fucking discussion. There is no way in Hell half the league hands over a 1st willingly for Sanchez. But who gives a shit? You only need one.
