Poll: what kind of stats does Sanchize have to put up to remain a Jet after next seas

And Wilson didn't give away points like Sanchez did. I also think it's absurd to note that Seattle's defense aided in the comeback as if the Jets didn't didn't do the same at Pittsburgh. They didn't allow any second half points and recorded a safety after the offense failed at the goal line.

 

They did aid in the comeback, I never said they didn't but when we got back w/in a score they failed. Our D cost us both title games.

 

sorry I missed this, my last response was from the nonsensical post of 1968.

I don't remember when I debated about getting those other QBs? I simplay stated a fact that Mark won 2 road playoff games as a rookie, it's nice Wilson was close but he didn't win, did he?

You lopve kaepernick now after his great game but if he was a Jets QB and then had bad games you'd want him gone too.

Sanchez was not a game manager in any season other than his rookie year.

Eli has 2 SBs b/c of his DEFENSE, his D and STs showed up in title games to send them to SBs, his D shut down the greatest Os in the game.

Peyton threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs in 4 postseason games the year he won a SB.

Sanchez didn't win a SB the first 2 years b/c his D failed in the title games.

 

"when all else fails, there's always delusion"

 

Seems pretty unfair to give the offense a free pass for shitting the bed in the first half because the defense didn't get the ball back to the offense on the final possession. This is especially true when you consider that they gave up 7 points on their own. How different is the game if that doesn't happen? Or what if they just scored the touchdown on the goal line instead of having to be bailed out by the defense? How much time does that save?

 

if you think fumbles, interceptions, bone head decision making are good qualities in a QB...then no arguments... u are right, Sanchez is great.

 

My definition of a bad game would be multiple turnover performances in your own territory (as in; I wouldn't be terribly broken up about a Hail Mary turnover in single coverage. I WOULD be upset about a turnover in triple coverage on a 5 yard pass) as well as fumbles.

I wouldn't want him gone. His abilities seem to far outweigh his negatives. Sanchez won road playoff games, but he lost the one that ultimately mattered. Not to mention the fact that he's regressed terribly. Wilson seems to have no indication of regressing. He pretty much put the team on his back to try and win that game.

It's a team game, and you have a good point. However, both Mannings have not regressed. Why is it that Sanchez has? And don't say talent, I"m not talking about that. I'm talking about seemingly basic quarterbacking skills that have been completely lost on Sanchez. When was the last time he threw the ball out of bounds instead of up for grabs?

 

The D allowed to begin the game with a NINE minute TD drive, was that the O's fault? They allowed Pitt's O to hold the ball for 22 of 30 mins in the 1st half and score 17 pts, our O was supposed to be amazing in 8 minutes?

we were down 17-0, we tried on 3rd and 17 b/c we were desperate at that point w/ the way the D collapsed. After the questionable fumble for a TD the O went right down and kicked a late FG then scored a TD to open the 2nd half and we were back in it. Both the O and D played well most of the 2nd half but when we needed a stop most the D failed.

 

Is someone actually arguing that Sanchez is in the same ballpark as Wilson? This guy had better then a 64% completion percentage and threw 26TD's with 10 picks.

If you were writing a column about NFL QB's Sanchez wouldn't be in the same article.

 

Nope, did not say Mark is better just simply stated a fact for as great as the rookie QBs were this year they combined for 1 playoff win while Mark had 2.

 

And had it not been for the #1 defense the Jets would have been 4-12 and never been to the playoffs to begin with.

 

The Jets inability to move the ball in the first half didn't aid in the time of possession? So to clarify, the Jets get themselves in a bad down and distance and surrender points on a turnover and it's because the defense made them desperate? I mean that's a major stretch on your part. No one in their right mind will say the Jets offense had a strong first half. That turnover isn't the same as losing a fumble in the 4th quarter down 40 points. It was a critical error. Seems you're very forgiving when the Jet offense fails (like at the goal line before the safety) but rarely when the defense does.

 

The Jets lost the Pittsburgh game because the D was outright bitch slapped and couldn't get off the field. Now that doesn't mean Sanchez didn't suck, but everyone knows the Jets were winning based on keeping games in check and dominating on D. It was clear from the begining of the Pittsburgh game that the D was spent and the Jets were done and we were. No fault on Mark he simply wasn't good enough to overcome that. That's not his fault.

The real problem Sanchez has going forward is this.

Mark was never really good even with the best rushing attack and best D in the league Mark was barely competent. He has had a couple of real good games his first NFL game as a starter and the playoff game against NE.

What Mark had going for him was he came into the league when there weren't that many good young QB's. That's now changed over night. Guys who are on their first contracts are killing it in this league right now. Now he is just another undersized drop back QB with a slow release who is grossly overpaid.

He has a very short window to turn it around or he will be out of the league.

 

#1 D in 2009 in rankings only, a true #1 D doesn't blow a double digit lead in the championship game.

if all they did was go 3 and out I can buy that but that wasn't the case. Our first drive after the 9 min TD drive was a 9 play drive that last almost 4 1/2 mins.

The O didn't have a great 1st half but again the D set the tone, a 9 min TD drive is a killer to start a game. It tookk the entire team unntil that FR TD to get going but the D killed us ultimately.

I am more forgiving of the offense, do you want to know why? It's b/c we are suppsoed be a defense 1st team, a team carried by our D so they are held to a different standard.

 

despite that he got us back w/in 5 pts w/ plenty of time to play.


He only had the #1 D(in ranking only) and rush attack one year. In 2010 the D was good but up and down and the run game was mediocre most of the year.

 

Clearly you have absolutely no idea what your even talking about. I'm getting to where I think you've never actually watched a game, only ESPN highlights.

You brought up the games in question, I took the first two and showed the entire game broken down by drives, your response? Nonsensical...You'd make me laugh if your ineptitude wasn't so glaring here.

The only thing nonsensical is your self delusion and self denial of the evidence.

 

I actually agree with you there...but that's largely due to the fact that the QB wasn't good enough to make the team more balanced.

 

if he doesn't fumble(I still don't think it was a fumble) then we go into the half down 20-0 instead of 24-3, essentially the same difference. We would have punted, Weatherford sucked in postseason so Pitt would have had great FP to at least get a FG. That fumble didn't cost us the game.

You showed me play by play in 2009 SD, I watched the game. you showed me play by play vs. NE '10, I watched the game. A stat sheet will only tell you so much. The fact that you are telling us mark was bad at SD and NE tells us all we need to know about your football knowledge.

 

:lol: yeah you really broke it down by copying and pasting play by play sheets!