He can't get together something he doesn't have, He isn't gonna wake up one morning and not be a scrub
You are comparing their pedigree, I am comparing their performance. It's very telling you cite Sanchez's "3 years", and utterly disregard his pathetic, embarrassing performance over 13 games in his 4th (and most telling) year. According to you, all of us who think Sanchez sucks are racists anyway, right?
Are you saying, with a straight face, that Braylon Edwards and Plaxico Burress were nobodies before the great Sanchize graced them with his presence? Really? No kidding? Never mind that Plaxico had an excellent career before almost literally shooting himself in the foot (well, it was leg... ) and his one year with the Jets didn't exactly set NFL records. You'd just like to ignore that, right? And what about Edwards? His time with the Jets was very productive, granted, but the guy is talented. People questioned him commitment and/or his hands, but Sanchez did not make him. In fact, it is blatantly apparent that it was the other way around. Whatever Sanchez did to look good was probably a result of having a good OL and good weapons around him early on. Now put down the pipe/needle/glue and get a cool 16 oz. of your favorite beer..... America's choice of drug.
When exactly did Mark become a 'scrub'? 2009-2010 he played well enough to get to the AFC championship game. 2011 was up and down, but judging by QB rating and Comp % he had 3-4 very mediocre performances, and 2 very poor performances. Nonetheless they were 8-5 and playing well before going into Philly. They go into Philly and he plays poorly, but mostly after driving twice down the field and having mistakes by Holmes cause turnovers... the trend continued and they were blown out. everyone knows how the season ended. This year has obviously been rough. but he has had flashes of older, more confident mark. What i'm saying is he is in a slump. It falls on him. But like its been argued all year, he has lacked weapons and the tebowmania has not helped him. Everyone needs to relax. See how he plays with braylon these last 3 games, and hopefully he can gain some momentum going into next year.
Whoa nelly.... Careful of using that metric. By saying a player is "successful" by measuring how many rings or playoff appearances they've had you discount a vast array of variables. How many scrubs have Super Bowl rings when Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, and so on, all do not! Are you saying some bench warmer who played one season on STs was more successful that all of these QBs? That is silly argument. But that is the metric you're applying to Sanchez. What about some of our bench warmers those first two seasons? Now that they've been cut, or they are out of the NFL, are they more successful than, or just as successful, as someone like Barry Sanders? I mean he hardly got close to a Super Bowl in his career... I think one NFCCG. So by your standard some guy with his ass plastered to the bench is more of a football success than numerous HoF players. Sorry it just doesn't work that way. Football is really the ultimate team sport. For this reason a crap player can really benefit from being on a good team..... conversely, a wonderful player can get swallowed by an awful team. Just ask Vinny Testaverde about the Bucs in the '80s. Edit- for the record, while defining 'success' is a losing proposition since NONE of our QBs save for Namath has even taken us to a SB, let alone won one, I think we've had numerous QBs better than Sanchez. Kenny O'Brien was better IMO. He was still as a statue, but that era had fewer mobile QBs (he was still on the glacial end tho if memory serves). He still ranks as one of the all time most accurate passers. Like Sanchez, though, this is a chicken and egg argument. Was he truly as accurate as they say or did he benefit from the likes of Al Toon (and cut Toon's career short with passes that exposed him to concussions)? I would argue that Vinny Testaverde was head and shoulders above Sanchez. We only got VT at the end of his career and he showed signs of what he could have been with a decent team. For everyone complaining about the current Jets roster and Sanchez not having support, this is NOTHING. Don't forget that teams like the Bucs of the '80s were really just as or more talent poor but in a league where the good teams were MUCH better--none of this parity shit. So VT was literally putting on a one man show at times and got lambasted for it. These two alone prove that Sanchez is not our second best/most successful QB ever. Sanchez hasn't won anything, so he isn't any more of a success than any of the others. So the question becomes who is better. He should benefit from playing in a passer's era and yet he still looks crap. Not good.
I don't think that is the argument at all. You are skewing the analogy. Sanchez started and played in all his road playoff wins. It's like saying Damon Huard has more super bowls than Dan Marino, just cuz he literally does. It's apples and oranges and it isnt an argument that anyone would sanely make.
I agree that it is a crap argument, but these are numerous posts on this forum where people make that exact argument. "Mark Sanchez is the second most successful QB in Jets history because he 'led' us to two AFCCGs". So while I agree with you that that is a crazy argument, it is being made by his supporters here and I disagree with this argument for the reasons I've stated. I've actually added to my post above because I would argue that Sanchez is not the second best QB we have ever had and this idea of declaring him second most successful is really a rubbish idea. After all, what do we get for losing the AFCCG? Now if you want to argue I've skewed the analogy because some players play more than others then you have a point, but only to an extent. That is why it is necessary to compare QBs to QBs. In this case there is the famous Trent Dilfer example. Did he LEAD the Ravens to a SB or did he ride along? Nothing skewed there as that is precisely the same exact argument Sanchez supporters. In fact, that is the ONLY argument made by Sanchez supporters to support this claim. His stats suck, his intangibles are almost nonexistent since he shows little in the way of traditional leadership qualities and so on. He hasn't shown continued growth in an upward curve. Even his regular season record is mediocre at this point and falling fast; he would rank well here only because of the Jet's abysmal history. The only metric one could apply to call Sanchez a success is that he led the Jets to those two AFCCGs. Hence my reply. And you are quite right, it isn't a sane argument because of the example you supplied.
Lindley was so badass the way hit completed pass after pass to those cameramen on the sidelines.......
The clown, uh, poster you quoted has no cred when it comes to Muck. Some posters like you see some good in Muck along with the bad, which is an acceptable pov. Seeing Muck as a great Qb is not supportable by any reasonable interpretation of the facts.
Your excellent point here is lost on the Muck defenders. They think success can be turned on, turned off, then turned back on again, as if the way he's been playing the last 16 games is some kind of mere apparition that can disappear with some magical combination of circumstances. David Carr was once considered a top prospect. But he lost his confidence, partly due to his own failings, but partly due to the situation he was in. The relative fault involved, in the end, was irrelevant. He became damaged goods and never recovered. It's the rare case of a Qb who falls and then rises again. I can only think of Rich Gannon in recent memory as such an example, and Gannon never fell as low as Sanchez has. Gannon also had the fundamentals all along. I'm not saying Sanchez might not do better in the "right" situation for him. But the Jets will never be right for him after all that has gone on. And even if he ends up elsewhere, I think there's no significant possiblity that he will ever be a real success.
he didnt become a scrub, he was always a scrub. its not some new revelation. no he didnt. he absolutely SUCKED. turned it over a ton, couldnt hit an open wideout. we got to the playoffs because of our defense, run game, and a lot of luck with teams resting guys late benefitting us. umm... no. he was epically bad. he was the main reason we collapsed down the stretch. he played horribly and led the NFL in turnovers. simply put, he is among the worst quarterbacks in football. By any measurement. Statically he is at the bottom. eyeball test at the bottom. hell, the only time we were every really successful with mark, was when we dont allow him to throw much. 14-4 when he throws 25 times or less, 3-0 in the postseason 17-23 when he throws more then 25 times, 1-2 in the post season. basically, if we can win without needing him to do anything, we are pretty good. but if we need him to do anything, we are pretty much screwed This year has obviously been rough. but he has had flashes of older, more confident mark. What i'm saying is he is in a slump. It falls on him. But like its been argued all year, he has lacked weapons and the tebowmania has not helped him. Everyone needs to relax. See how he plays with braylon these last 3 games, and hopefully he can gain some momentum going into next year.[/QUOTE]
huh? Plaxico Burress last 2 full seasons prior to sanchez: 133 Catches, 2,013 yards, 22 touchdowns made the pro bowl Braylon Edwards 2 seasons prior to playing with sanchez: 135 Catches, 2,162 yards, 20 touchdowns. Made the pro bowl, and was an NFL all pro in that span. Nothing before sanchez? how about they were absolute pro bowl/all pro studs who combined for 42 touchdowns in 4 seasons?
I'd take kolb and skelton over sanchez in a second. Lindley is hot trash. no better then sanchez. if you factor in money, id take lindley, otherwise sanchez.
i dont think you can "expect" to win the superbowl no matter what team and what QB you have. so I am going to rephrase your question this way: 1) How many QBs do you put on this roster and expect to CONTEND for a superbowl? A: 4 or 5 (Brady, Rodgers, Eli, Peyton, maybe Brees) 2) How Many QBs do you put on this roster and expect to make the playoffs and win 11+ games? A: 12 (RG3, Flacco, Ryan, Stafford, Schaub, Luck, Big Ben, Dalton, Freeman, Romo, Newton, Smith) 3) How many QBs do you put on this roster and have a better record then we have now? A: 9 (Bradford, Wilson, Ponder, Cutler, Foles, Palmer, Locker, Weeden, Tannehill, McElroy, Tebow) 4) How many QBs do you put on this roster and have a worse record? A: 2 or 3(lindley, gabbert, cassell, maybe some backups?)
no it doesnt, it means his leash just gets longer and we have to suffer another season identical to this one
Maybe spending some time with Edwards will help him along. It might be an added bonus in signing him.
I wasn't talking about plaxico. I don't think most NFL fans were familiar with Braylon till Mark propelled him to to the spotlight how many playoff and AFCG catches did Braylon have before Sanchez got him? I was more talking about guys like Cotchery and Keller anyways
Wow way to stretch context. Plaxico's 2 seasons prior to Sanchez was followed by a jail term in case you forgot. And as for Braylon's 2 seasons prior, a majority of those numbers happened in one monster year. It was the other year that caused Cleveland to dump him to begin with.
